Skip to main content

Full text of "The Ancestor : a quarterly review of county and family history, heraldry and antiquities .."

See other formats

3 1833 01230 6640 





Digitized by tlie Internet Archive 
in 2014 



A Quarterly Review of County and 
Family History, Heraldry 
and Antiquities 



Number VIII 


The pages ot the Ancestor will be open 
to correspondence dealing with matters 
within the scope of the review. 

Questions will be answered, and advice 
will be given, as far as may be possible, 
upon all points relating to the subjects 
with which the Ancestor is concerned. 

While the greatest care will be taken 
of any MSS. which may be submitted for 
publication, the Editor cannot make him- 
self responsible for their accidental loss. 

All literary communications should be 
addressed to 

The Editor of the Ancestor 
2 Whitehall Gardens 

Westminster S.W 




THE ANGELO FAMILY. . . . Rev. Charles Sv^tynnerton i 

OUR OLDEST FAMILIES ; X. The Berkeleys . The Editor 73 



The Editor 100 

THE VANDEPUT FAMILY . . . . N. E. T. Bosanquet iio 



W. Paley Baildon, F.S.A. 113 



Exul 167 


Rev. E. E. Dorling 202 



Rev. E. E. Dorling 215 



Copyright of all the Articles and Illustrations 
in this Review is strictly reserved 




Catherine Angelo Frontispiece 

DoMENicK Angelo as a * Fencer ' 12 

DoMENicK Angelo as an Old Man 14 

Elizabeth, Wife of Domenick Angelo op. 16 

Elizabeth, Wife of Domenick Angelo „ 18 

Henry Angelo as a Boy „ 22 

Henry Angelo I. as a * Fencer ' „ 26 

General William St. Leger^ 

John Angelo of Edinburgh J 

Ann Caroline Angelo . . . .'i 

Florella Sophia Angelo of Eton J 

Marie Dubourgh, Wife of John Angelo \ 

Martha Bland, Wife of Anthony Angelo J " 

Mrs. Jane Bland, Mother of Mrs. Anthony Angelo . . „ 68 

Mrs. Richard Angelo . . . 

Louisa Oldfield Angelo . . V „ 70 

Colonel Richard Fisher AngeloJ 

Seals of the Barons' Letter. Five plates „ 100-8 

St. George and the Dragon, from a Carving „ 112 

Illustrations of Early XIV. Century Costume. en plates , ,,148-66 

Nevill Shields from Glass at Salisbury „ 202 

Montagu Shield from Glass at Hazelbury Bryan ... ,, 216 

[ Sir Joshua EeynaLds ] 


MANY are the stories told of the families of the emigres 
who flocked into England from France and Italy during 
the latter half of the eighteenth century, but few exceed in 
interest that of the Angelo family. They were Italians. Their 
surname however was not Angelo, but Tremamondo. It is 
a name suggestive of long descent and the deadly shock of 
volcanic forces ; it means a tremor of the world ; it implies 
some sort of universal earthquake. And their motto and ar- 
morial bearings, whether theirs by long inheritance, or theirs 
by the invention of some modern genealogist, carry out the 
same idea, being quite in the manner of the ' canting heraldry ' 
of old time. In direct allusion to the name Tremamondo the 
shield is azure with a thunderbolt striking a mountain, and the 
motto, ingeniously adapted from a verse in the Psalms, is 
Tremat mundus, ' Tremamondo ' however would probably be 
found to be the name of a more than ordinarily uneasy locality 
in the volcanic province of Naples, from which the family 
originally came, and the earliest form of the personal name 
was doubtless not 'Tremamondo,' but 'di Tremamondo.' 
Yet whatever their antiquity, whatever their origin in the long- 
vanished past, whether or not, as alleged by them, descended 
from one of the Pagani, followers of Tancred in the Holy 
Wars, in the more recent times of the seventeenth and 
eighteenth centuries this family, like many other families of 
noble origin, had become identified with the trading and com- 
mercial classes, so that now, I understand, the name Trema- 
mondo is not to be found on any existing roll of Italian nobility. 
And the earliest member of the family to settle in England, in 
or immediately after the year 1753, seems to have been fully 
conscious of that fact, because when he first burst upon the 
highly conventional world of George II. 's reign, in all the 
glory of his fame and skill as a matchless fencer and rider, 
he appears to have been curiously oblivious of his own patro- 
nymic, and to have used by preference that of his mother 
who was a Malevolti. Thus in his marriage register he is 
entered as Domenico Angelo Malevolti. Again his son Henry, 
in the record of his baptism, is stated to be son to Angelo 



Domenko Makvolti, And later on, when he was one of the 
best known men in London, the inscription engraved on the 
three-bottle silver goblet which was given to him by Garrick was 
— Fegno amictzia di David Garrick al suo amico Angela Male- 
void} Even in his son's account of him he figures gloriously 
as Dominico Angela Malevolti Tremamondo^ But a different story 
presents itself when we turn to the Rate Books of St. James', 
Westminster, and of St. Ann's, Soho. In those formal 
business documents the name Malevolti does not come in at all. 
In them he is entered as Dominico Angelo Tremamondo^ or else as 
Domenick Angelo merely. Again, when he witnesses his daughter 
Caroline's marriage in 1785, he writes his own name D. Angelo 
T remamondo. Yet again, when witnessing the marriage register 
of his daughter Catherine in 1790, he writes the simple name 
Donff° Angelo, In the midst of all this confusion we are driven 
to his own baptismal register in the cathedral church of Leg- 
horn, where the secret is disclosed, and we find that his full, 
true, and undoubted name was Angiolo Domenico Maria Trema- 
mondo. Such a tremendous name as this however was found 
to be quite unmanageable. So, for practical purposes, 
acting also under the advice of Lord Pembroke, and others ot 
his patrons, he gradually, as the records prove, discarded both 
the names Malevolti and Tremamondo, and fell back on his 
first Christian name Angelo as a convenient and suitable sur- 
name. Hence 'Angelo,' standing severely alone, is the one 
name appended to the dedication of his superb volume on the 
art of fencing, and hence also among the public generally from 
King George III. down to the humblest stable-boy in his 
manige^ Angelo is the name by which he and his brethren were 
known then, and the name by which they and their de- 
scendants are known at the present day. 

MONDO was the son of a prosperous merchant of the Via 
Giardino in Leghorn, having been the eldest of six brothers 
born in that city to James Tremamondo and Catherine Angiola 
Malevolti his wife, a daughter of Nicolas Malevolti of the 
same place. Evidently he derived his first Christian name 
Angelo from his mother, as he derived his second (Domenico) 
from his grandfather and his third (Maria) from his godfather, 
and from his mother therefore came also that surname Angelo 

^ Henry Angela* s Reminiscences, 1828. ' Ibid. 


which is now the common property of all his descendants both 
direct and collateral. He was born on 6 February, 1 7 1 7, and 
baptized in the cathedral church the next day. His father 
James Tremamondo was a native and a citizen of Foggia in 
the kingdom of Naples and a son of Domenick Tremamondo 
of the same city and province. His godfather was Francis 
Maria Lorenzi.^ His younger brothers, five in number, were 
Francis Xavier, born 4 December, 1720; Joseph, born 13 
November, 1721 ; John Xavier, born 22 September, 1723 ; 
Leonard Maria, born 6 September, 1725 ; and Sante Gaetano, 
born I November, 1732. There were also several sisters, of 
whom one, Santa Catherina, ultimately became the superior of a 
convent in or near Florence.^ An inspection of the registers 
given below indicates that, of the brothers, one, Joseph, died 
on the day of his birth, because he was hurriedly baptized the 
same day, his sponsor being apparently the surgeon in attend- 
ance, the 'Excellent Signor Doctor John Batta Gameno.* It 
is also more than likely that as Santa Catherina became a nun, 
so Sante Gaetano was destined for and became a priest or a 
monk. I shall also give reason presently for suspecting that 
John Xavier the fourth son died before the descent of the 
Angelos on England, and that the second son, Francis Xavier, 
coming to England, assumed the name John in lieu of his own, 
Francis. There would remain therefore only three brothers to 
account for. All these three, namely Angelo Domenick of 
whom we are now treating, John Xavier, and Leonard Maria, 
ultimately found their way to England. 

In view of the claim of the family that they are descendants 
of the Malevolti through Catherine Angela Malevolti, it may 
be well to say here a few words upon that illustrious stock. 

According to some authorities ' the most noble family of 
Malavolti ' was by origin French, and came to Italy with 
Charlemagne. Others say that they were originally Bolognese, 
adding that between Bologna and the Appennines there is a 
place very delicious called Malavolti, and that in the churches 
of St. Domenick and St. Francis in Bologna are many monu- 
ments of the Malavolti. But Gigli argues that the Mala- 
volti were in Sienna before the others were in existence, and 
that therefore either there were two families, or a member of 
the Malavolti went and settled in Bologna. He also states 

^ See infra. 

^ Angclo's Reminiscences and Fami/y Traditions. 



that the family Had their habitation in a gloomy valley near 
Sienna, full of robbers, and so called Malavolti. Noble 
Frenchmen were on guard there, and five castles were 
erected which were also called Malavolti, and the hill too 
began to be called // Poggio di Malavolti^ retaining that name 
to the present day. They made of themselves an illustrious 
family which in time rose to great power and wealth. ' Furono 
le mitre, e i grandi militari, e togati quasi domestici nella 
schiatta de' Malavolti.' They divided into three branches, 
first the Malavolti Orlandi, next the Malavolti Egidei or 
Gigliensi, so called from having built a church in that 
region to St. Egidius,^ and thirdly, Malavolti Fortebracci, 
who on account of the castle of Selvoli which they captured 
were called Selvolesi. In Sienna the Malavolti had three 
castles and a magnificent loggia^ 

So much for the Malevolti family. To return to Domenick 
Angelo — the following evidences from the Leghorn Cathedral 
constitute our earliest notices of the Tremamondos : — 


Parrochia della Catted rale. 

Livorno, 7 Luglio, 1899. 
Attesto io sottoscritto Parroco della Chiesa Cattedrale die dai Registri di 
Matrimonio apparisce come il di 3 Decembre, 171 3, contrassero il S. Matri- 
monio in Facie Ecclesia, Jacopo d[i] Domenico Tremamondi di Foggia g[ia] 
in[orto] dimorante con Caterina Angela d' g[ia] m[orto] Niccolo Malevolti di 
Livorno essendo presenti e testimoni Andrea di Domenico Cerboni di Lucca 
e Ippolito di Luca Sperandio di Livorno. 
In fede, etc. 

Translation : — 

Parish of the Cathedral. 

Leghorn, 7 July, 1899. 
I the undersigned parish priest of the Cathedral Church attest that by the 
registers of marriage it appears that on the 3 December, 171 3, there con- 
tracted Holy Matrimony in the face of the church, James, son of Domenick 
Tremamondi of Foggia, a late deceased resident, with Catherine Angela, 

1 Giles. 

^ Gigli^s Diario Sanese (1723), ii. 147--54. There is also a long account 
of the achievements of this family in the Galleria del TOnorey Forli, 1735. 
But for the fixed idea in the Angelo family that there is a missing Tremamondo 
marquisate somewhere in the kingdom of Naples, I should feel inclined to 
trace the tradition rather to their alleged descent from the Malevolti. 



daughter of the late Nicolas Malevolti of Leghorn, present and witnesses 
being Andrew son of Domenick Cerboni of Lucca and Ippolito son of Luke 
Sperandio of Leghorn. 
In fede, etc. 

ArchiVio della Cattedrale di Livorno. 

Sac Vittorio Philippo Cappi° C°. 


Livorno a di 3 di Magzio, 1899. 

Attestasi da me infr.*° Parroco della Cattedrale che dal Libro dei Battez- 
zati delFAnno 1717 resulta che il di 6 Febhaio, 17 17, nacque Angiolo 
Domenico Maria d' Giacomo d' Domenico Tremamondi d' Foggia Regno d' 
Napoli e d' Lattno Angiola d. g. m. Niccolo Malevolti d' Livomi emuz, 
fu Battezzato il di 7 Febhaio, 1 7 1 7, e fu compare Francesco M^ Lorenzi. 

In fede di ec. 

Archivio della Cattedrale di Livorno. 

Livorno a di 13 di Maggio, 1899. 

Attestasi da me infr.^"* Parroco della Cattedrale che dal Libro dei Battez- 
zati dell'Anno 1720 resulta che il di 4 Decembre, 1720, nacque Fran''° 
Xaverio d' Giacomo g.m. Domenico Tremamondo e d' Cat^ Angelo g.m. 
Niccolo Manivolti coniugi fu Battezzato il di 5 Xmbre, 1720, e fu compare 
Giovanni Simondri. 

In fede di ec. 

Archivio della Cattedrale di Livorno. 

Jac Abdan Bonfiglioli, 

V Parroco. 

Livorno a di 13 di Maggio, 1899. 

Attestasi da me infr.' Parroco della Cattedrale che dal Libro dei Battezzati 
dell* Anno 1721 resulta che il di 13 Novembre, 1721, nacque Guiseppe d' 
Giacomo g.m. Domenico Tremamondo e d' Cat^ Ang"* g.m. Niccolo Malevolti 
coniugi fu Battezzato il di 13 Nov. 1721, e fu compare Ecc® Sig. Dott. Gio. 
Batta Gameno. 

In fede di ec. 

Archivio della Cattedrale di Livorno. 

Jac Abdan Bonfiglioli, 

V® Parroco. 

Livorno a di 13 di Maggio, 1899. 

Attestasi da me infr.*° Parroco della Cattedrale che dal Libro dei Battezzati 
delPAnno 1723 resulta che il di 22 Settembre, 1723, nacque Gio. Xaverio d' 
Giacomo g.m. Dom*^° Tremamondo e d' Cat° Angelo g.m. Niccolo Malevolti 
coniugi fu Battezzato il di 23 Sett., 1723, e fu compare O. Moriondi. 

In fede di ec. 

Archivio della Cattedrale di Livorno. 

Jac Abdan Bonfiglioli, 

V* Parroco. 



Livomo a di 13 di Maggio, 1899. 

Attestasi da me infi:.^° Parroco della Cattedrale che dal Libro dei Battezzati 
dell' Anno 1727 resulta che il di 6 Settembre, 1725, nacque Leonardo 

d' Giacomo g.m. Domenico Trema Mondo e d' Cat^ AngP g.m. Niccolo 
Manevolti coniugi fu Battezzato il di 9 Sett., 1725, e fu compare Leonaldo 
Cemmellini . 

In fede di ec. 

Archivio della Cattedrale di Livomo. 

Jac Abdan Bonfiglioli, 


Livorno a di 13 di Maggio, 1899. 

Attestasi da me infr.*° Parroco della Cattedrale che dal Libro dei Battezzati 
dell' Anno, 1732, resulta che il di i Novembre, 1732, nacque Santi Gaetano 
d' Giacomo g.m. Domenico Tremamondo e di Caterina Angiola g.m. Niccolo 
Manevolti coniugi fii Battezzato il di 2 grrJbre, 1723, e fa compare Carlo 

In fede di ec. 

Archivio della Cattedrale di Livorno. 

Jac Abdan Bonfiglioli, 


These evidences afford the following descent : — 

Pedigree i. 

Domenick Tremamondo=Wife 
of Foggia 

of Foggia and then 1 d. of jNicolas Malevolti 
of Leghorn | of Leghorn, married 171-: 


Angelo Domenick Maria, 

Francis Xavier, 

Joseph, John Xavier, 

b. 1717 

b. 1720 

b. 1721 b. 1723 

(d. 1721) 

1 , 

Leonard Maria, 
b. 1725 


Sante Gaetano, 

b. 1732. Probably 

a priest 

The three members of this family who afterwards visited 
England, but especially the eldest, Angelo Domenick, became 
widely celebrated as masters in the arts of both riding and 
fencing. Of such exceptional skill as was theirs the founda- 
tions surely must have been laid very early in life, and it is a 
fair hypothesis to assume that from boyhood they were placed 
in the hands of capable instructors. In point of fact there 


was then living in Leghorn the very man for the purpose. 
This was Andrew Gianbaldoni of Pisa, renowned as a fencing 
master, who kept a fencing school at Leghorn, at which city 
his far more famous son Joseph, whose tragic fate at Lyons 
aroused the sympathy of all Europe, was born on 6 January, 
1739. Under Gianbaldoni we can imagine the 'Angelo' 
brothers gradually acquiring some of the marvellous power 
which afterwards distinguished them, and when they had 
qualified in Gianbaldoni's school we can imagine them going 
forth on their travels to other centres famous for other maitres d* 
escrime. Domenick certainly did so, as we learn from his son's 
Reminiscences. He visited various capitals, probably Florence, 
Turin, Milan, Naples and Rome, and he lived for a time at 
Venice, where, having also studied painting himself,^ he was inti- 
mate with Canaletto. At the age of twenty-seven, or thereabouts, 
he came to Paris,^ where he is said to have spent ten years 
in close study of the art of fence under various masters 
of the Acadimie^ but especially the elder Teillagory, with 
whom also he constantly rode in the manage. That master 
was one of the most celebrated swordsmen of the age. He 
was likewise the most scientific horseman in Europe, and 
occupied as prominent a place in the Manige Royal as he did 
in the Acadimie d Armes^ In better hands for both riding 
and fencing the ' Angelos ' (for I believe the brothers kept 
together) could not have been. There also Domenick became 
a protege of the Duke de Nivernais, that amiable and cour- 
teous nobleman who subsequently visited this country at the 
close of the Seven Years' War in the character of Ambassador 
Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary from His Most Christian 
Majesty Louis XV.* 

From Paris ^ Domenick Angelo ' passed on to London, 
where he founded that celebrated family of masters which 
made the ' Angelo School of Arms ' a household word among 
men of fashion in the days of our grandsires.^ It is not my 
intention however to make mention of all the recorded 
episodes which distinguished the career of the elder Angelo, 
as he came to be called. For them the reader should consult 
his son Henry's Reminiscences^ Angelo s Pic-niCy the Dictionary of 

* My father imbibed an early penchant for the fine arts, particularly for 
painting ' (H. A.'s Reminiscences), 

^ Circa 1743. ^ History of the Szvord. 

* Austin Dobson in Longman^ s. ^ History of the Szvord. 



National Biography, and articles in various magazines, includ- 
ing the Parish Magazine of St. Anne's, Soho, for March and 
April, 1902. The more important passages in his life how- 
ever will bear re-stating, and of all stories connected with him 
there is not one more characteristic perhaps of the man, and 
not one certainly more characteristic of the age, than the 
account which his son Henry has preserved to us of the 
romantic accident which took from Paris and gave to London 
his interesting personality. The occasion was a public assault 
of arms at one of the great h6tels of the pre-revolutionary 
Paris, in which 'Angelo,' with his tall straight figure^ and 
winning address, took a conspicuous part. Among the guests 
assembled sat Mrs. Margaret Woffington, then at the zenith 
of her beauty and fame as woman and actress. Her dis- 
criminating fancy was caught by the graceful person not less 
than by the skill of the handsome Italian, and she fell in love 
with him. Stepping forward, she gave him a bunch of roses, 
which she detached from her own bosom, and which Angelo 
gaily pinned on his left breast, declaring that he would defend 
it against a world in arms. He justified his statement, for in 
no encounter was a petal disturbed, and when the assault 
closed he received the reward said to belong only to the 
brave — the smile of fair lady. It was the turning point in 
his career. Peg Woffington induced him to try his fortunes 
in London. They drove in the same coach together to the 
coast, victrix and vanquished, and crossed in the same vessel 
to England. After a brief stay in London they visited Dublin, 
where Angelo formed a friendship with the Sheridans, and 
where he also met Arthur Murphy the dramatist. Thence 
in due time they returned to London and there lived, re- 
maining fast friends for two years, at the end of which period 
* Angelo ' married. 

It was to Peg Woffington herself, one of the most gener- 
ous and unselfish of women, that Domenick Angelo was in- 
debted for his wife. The story has been often told. The 
two, Angelo and Mrs. Woffington, were together one evening 
at the play, when Angelo's attention was directed to a young 
Irish lady* sitting with her mother in a neighbouring box. 

^ * My father (at Court), as I have heard, went by the title of Chevalier 
Perpendicular* {Rminiscences). 

^ * My mother was a native of that dear little island ' (Angelo* s Pic-niCf 
P- 293). 


* She has the face of an angel ! ' said Mrs. Woffington, who 
appears to have known her before, and who advised the ardent 
Italian to pay court to and to marry her. Fortune smiled on 
him, and his suit was successful. The lady was very young, 
not more than seventeen, her name was Elizabeth Johnson, 
and she was a step-daughter of a Captain Master of the 
Royal Navy, then deceased, who had once been in command 
of the Chester} They were married on 25 February, 1755, 
by archbishop's licence, at St. George's, Hanover Square, and 
the following is a copy of the marriage entry : — 

Marriage. — Domenick Angelo Malevolti, Esq'., of this Parish, Batchelor, 
and Elizabeth Johnson, Spinster, a Minor of this parish, by and with the 
consent of Elizabeth Master, formerly Johnson, wid : the natural and lawful 
mother of the said Elizabeth, the Minor, were married in this Church by 
Licence of the Archbishop of Canterbury this twenty-fourth day of February, 
in the Year One Thousand Seven Hundred and fifty-five, by me James 
Trebeck, A.M. Clerk in Orders. 

This marriage was solemnized ) Domenico Angelo Malevolti. 

between us j Eliz™. Johnson. 

In the presence of 

Eli"^". Johnson. 
J. Morris.^ 

Elizabeth Johnson was one of the beauties of the time, 
and in 1760, when she was twenty- two, her picture was 
painted by Sir Joshua Reynolds.^ This picture remained 
with her descendants till recently, when it found its way to 
Christie's, where for ^^00 it fell into the hands of a Mr. 
Yerkes, an American, who took it to New York. 

Elizabeth Johnson's father was probably a naval officer 
like her step-father, and she is said to have been related to 
Admiral Byng. 'AH my mother's relations,' says her son 
Henry in his Reminiscences^ ' were brought up to the sea, and, 
from her information, she was related to Admiral Byng.' 
The following brief pedigree (which however I have not 
verified) might afford the clue to the exact relationship, and it 
will be observed that, curiously enough, both her father's 
name, ' Johnson,' and her step-father's name, * Master,' occur 
in it : — 

1 Henry Angelo's Reminiscences. 

' John Morris, a friend of the Masters, and a distinguished naval officer, 
who, when in commend of the Bristol, was mortally wounded in the unsuc- 
cessful attack on Sullivan's Island, off Charlestown, on 28 June, 1776. His 
son was the more famous Vice-Admiral Sir James NicoU Morris {D.N.B.) 

' Leslie and Taylor's Lije and Times of Sir Joshua Reynolds. 



John Byng of= 



Pedigree 2. 

: Philadelphia Johnson 
d. of — Johnson of Loans, Surrey, 
and sister of Colonel Johnson 

[St Viscount Torrington= Margaret 

I George Byng), 

d. of James Master 

of East Langdon, 
Kent, d, 1756 

Admiral Byng 
(John), 4th son 

In this connection the following extract is also curious : 
« DEATH. Mrs. Masters, Ann, aet. 8 6, Aunt to Admiral Byng ' 
(G.M. for 1757, p. 169)/ 

On the off-chance that here we have Elizabeth Johnson's 
father and mother, the following note of a marriage may be 
also recorded for future inquiry : ' Richard Johnson and 
Elizabeth Harvey married at St. George's, Hanover Square, 

It was as a teacher of the ' Art of Equitation,' to adopt 
Henry Angelo's description, that Domenick Angelo first 
became famous after his descent on England. His success 
was marvellously rapid. After a performance in the presence 
of George II., that monarch declared that ' Mr. Angelo was 
the most elegant rider in Europe.' Among his early patrons 
was the Duke of Queensberry, whose friendship he owed to 
the Duchess' attachment to his wife, as to which Henry Angelo 
writes : ' The Duchess of Queensberry had honoured my 
grandmother with her friendly notice for many years, and the 
same to my mother from the time she could first lisp her 
grace's name.' Of infinitely greater service to him, however, 
was the friendship of Henry Herbert, tenth Earl of Pem- 
broke, who became warmly attached to him. Lord Pembroke 
was then (1754) only nineteen or twenty years of age. He 
was a very rising and most zealous officer, devoted to horses, 
and a great favourite at Court. He started a private manege 
of his own at his house in Whitehall and another close to his 
seat of Wilton near Salisbury, and Angelo became his Scuyer, 
Angelo's principles he approved, studied, and practised ; he 
became his disciple ; ^ and when he assumed command of 

^ In the evidences Master and Masters seem to be used interchangeably. 
' With Angelo, Pembroke had taken much pains 
To keep a good seat and to handle the reins. 

{Squib of the time.) 


Elliot's Light Horse (now the 1 5th Hussars), the crack regi- 
ment of the time, he persuaded Angelo to take a house at 
Wilton and to undertake the training of a select number of 
riding instructors from the regiment. Some of Angelo's 
principles he afterwards embodied in his Method of Breaking 
Horses (1762), becoming in time quite an authority himself in 
the art of riding in the army. It is important to take note of 
these facts, namely (i) Angelo's intimacy with Lord Pem- 
broke, and (2) Angelo's connection with the British Army. 
For a time he was practically Riding Master to the Army,^ and 
the principles which he introduced, approved by Lord Pem- 
broke, of riding, breaking, and training horses, were those 
which were followed throughout the whole of the Cavalry 
Service. In connection with this matter it is interesting to 
find, as a detail, that Philip Astley, afterwards to be so famous 
for his riding in his own amphitheatre, was one of the troopers 
who came under Angelo's training at Wilton. 

In 1755 Domenick Angelo was described as a resident in 
the parish of St. George's, Hanover Square {marriage register^ 
In 1758 he was the tenant of a house in St. James* Place, parish 
of St. James', and the following extract from the Rate Books 
of St. James' shows it : — 

St. James Place. 
1758 I Domenico Angelo^ | II | ^^30 | j^i 5j. 

The meaning of this mysterious entry is that in 1758 Dom- 
enick Angelo had a house in St. James' Place, the rateable 
value of which was £'}^o a year, that he owed for two quarters 
(' II '), the sum due for the two quarters being £1 55., making 
his full rate for the year £2 lOJ., being ij. 8^. in the If 
the rate was levied on five-sixths of his rent, his true rent must 
have been £t^6. 

Probably Domenick Angelo did not remain at St. James' 
Place more than two years or so. But he could not have re- 
mained less, because his son Henry, who was born in 1756, 
remembered that when he was not four years old his father 
was living at St. James' Place, and that his nurse used to take 

^ * My fother,' says Henry, * had finished some of the first riding masters 
for the Cavalry Regiments gratis ' {Reminiscences , ii. 385). 

^ * Domenico ' in Angelo's own handwriting is written on the interleaved 
blotting paper. 



him to St. James' Church, where on one occasion he startled 
the worshippers by untimely patriotic vociferations.^ 

Meanwhile Domenick Angelo, who must have kept himself 
always in practice, had laid himself out as an exponent of the 
art of fence, having on a certain notable occasion, duly 
recorded by his son, utterly vanquished Dr. Keys, the cham- 
pion fencer of Ireland, at the Thatched House. Angelo's first 
pupil was the Duke of Devonshire, but presently he was ap- 
pointed Fencing Master and Riding Master to the Prince of 
Wales, afterwards George III., to Edward Duke of York, and 
to the other young princes, with whom he at once became a 
great favourite and whose friendship and goodwill he retained 
to the end of his life. Suitable premises for both fencing and 
riding were provided for him by the Princess Dowager of 
Wales in Leicester Fields, within two doors from Hogarth's 
house in the east corner.* And there he must have taken up 
his quarters, probably in 1759 or 1760, as about that time his 
name disappears from the Rate Books of St. James'. He soon 
acquired so much fame and his clientele became so large that he 
now decided to set up an academy of his own. For this pur- 
pose he moved to Soho. There he bought from Lord Dela- 
val, brother of Foote's patron, the Sir Francis to whom he 
dedicated his comedy of Taste^ Carlisle House, standing in 
King's Square Court (now Carlisle Street).^ It was a spacious 
old Caroline mansion of red brick, which had belonged to the 
Howard family, containing lofty rooms with enriched ceilings, 
a marble-floored hall, and a grand decorated staircase painted 
by Salvator's pupil, Henry Cook,* In this building, in 1763, 
its new owner opened his fencing school, and in the garden at 
the back he erected stables and a manege which extended to 
Wardour Street.^ His house and schools soon became the 
resort of all the wealth and rank of London. Here he took 
in his boarders, ' young men of fashion,' who paid him each one 
hundred guineas a year, and who spent their time in riding, 
fencing and dancing, and here he earned his ;^4,ooo a year 
which * he spent like a gentleman.' ^ Among the famous men 
who congregated round him at that period were the two Sheri- 
dans, Garrick, Foote, Johnson, Christian Bach, Horne Tooke, 
Sir Joshua Reynolds, Gainsborough, Zoffany, Canaletto, Zuc- 

^ Reminiscences. 

' Longman' Sy A^. 1898. » Ibid. * Ibid. « Ibid. 

" Angelo's Reminiscences and History of the Stvord. 

>rawn from life by Gwyn and engraved by Hall for the Ecole des Armes) 



carellij Bartolozzi, Cipriani, General Paoli, the Chevalier 
D'Eon, Wilkes, George Stubbs the author of the Anatomy of 
the Horse^ Sir William Jones, and a host of others of all ranks 
and pursuits in life, forming a brilliant company of wits, 
politicians, artists and actors, some of whom almost daily met 
at his hospitable board/ 

In 1763 Angelo published his grand folio in French — 
UEcole des Armes, It is a magnificent specimen of contem- 
porary binding and letter-press, and the engravings are of the 
highest possible order. It is dedicated to their Royal High- 
nesses, Princes William Henry and Henry Frederic, and the 
list of subscribers includes four Royal Highnesses, two Serene 
Highnesses, the Duke de Nivernais, Domenick's old Paris 
patron, and many of the principal nobility, clergy and gentry 
of the day. In his dedication a leurs Altesses Royales^ Angelo 
refers to toutes les bontes dont elks mont toujours honorS^ and 
humbly and gracefully begs their acceptance of his work. 
Speaking of this book, his son Henry declares that his father 
was assisted by the best artists of the day — ' two of the en- 
gravings in particular,' he says, ' were by Hall who finished 
Woolett's plate of General Wolfe, and the others by poor 
Ryland who suffered.' And Gwyn, Hall and Ryland are the 
names which figure at the foot of the plates. What is more, 
Angelo himself stood for the drawings, so that in these en- 
gravings we have his presentment exactly as he figured in 
fence.^ The originals he presented to His Majesty George 
III., ' who graciously received him at Buckingham Palace, 
where he was kept in conversation for above an hour, when to 
his surprise, being questioned about his coming to England, 
he found that the king had been previously acquainted with 
his attachment to Mrs. Woffington, and his marriage with my 
mother.' ^ 

One circumstance in the life of Domenick Angelo, usually 
passed over, bears directly upon the present paper, and that is 
that during the summer vacation of 1765 he visited Turin. 
* My father,' writes Henry, ' once received a commission from 
the King of Sardinia to send him sixty horses, hunters, and in 

^ For many a vivid anecdote relating to Angelo's celebrated guests, con- 
sult his son's Reminiscences and his Pic-nic (1828 and 1834). 

^ The figure on plate I. he declares was a very faithful likeness of his 
father. It has been reproduced for this paper. 

^ Angelo's Reminiscences. 



the summer vacation at Eton he came with my mother and 
then followed them to Turin. He presented the horses him- 
self to the king. The Princess of Carignan admired my 
mother's saddle, which she had brought with her, and my 
mother requested her acceptance of it.' 

The date of this visit is fixed by the fact that when at Paris 
on his way to Turin Domenick received a letter from Garrick 
bearing date July, 1765.^ He must have sent the horses on 
by some trustworthy agent^ — his brother Leonard or his 
nephew Anthony, the latter then being eighteen years of age. 

From 1763 to 1803, a period of forty years, Domenico 
Angelo's name regularly appears in the various Rate Books of 
St. Ann's, Soho. 

The following selected extracts are of interest : — 

St. Ann's Poor Rate — King's Square Court, North (Carlisle St.) 

(I) 1764 


Dom'^ Angelo 
Dom'' Angelo Tremamondo 
Domenick Angelo 

115 o 

3 I loi 

By a simple sum in arithmetic his true rent in 1764 and 
1770 is seen to be at least ;^i44 and £i()0 respectively — an 
index of his prosperity at that time. But in 1790 his assessed 
rent had sunk to £^2 only, and he was in arrear for the whole 

(2) Hair and Powder Tax of 1795 (for the cost of the * French War ') 

Carlisle St., No. 20. 
Angelo, Dominico — Housekeeper. 
„ Elizabeth — Wife. 
„ Sophia - — Daughter. 

The rest of his children had married or died. Sophia had 
long been a Dame of Eton, and probably only resided occa- 
sionally at Carlisle Place. 

(3) 1796 I Watch Rate : — 

Dom. Angelo Tremamondo \ £9S \ 3^- 9^' \ 

1799-00 I Rector's Rate : — 

Domenick Angelo \ £^2 \ £0 ^. \d. \ 

Then comes the following significant entry : — 

1803 I Paving Rate : — 

Mrs. Angelo undertakes to pay her proportion 2 qrs. 
^ Reminiscences, ii. 91-2. 



In the year 1804 the name of Angelo no longer appears 
on the books. The old man had, in fact, died at Eton, pro- 
bably at the house of his daughter Sophia : — 

1802, July nth. At Eton in his 86th year, Mr. A. (//V) Angelo, 
Fencing and Riding Master.^ 

His will at Somerset House is dated 11 May, 1797, and 
it was proved 4 August, 1802. Everything he possessed he 
left to his ' dear wife, Elizabeth Angelo,' and he styles himself 
'Domenico Angelo Tremamondo, of Carlisle Street, Soho.' 
The affidavit was made by ' George Frederick Angelo 
Tremamondo of His Royal Highness the Duke of York's 
office, Horse Guards, the natural and lawful grandson/ 
Domenick's sole witness was Albany Wallis. 

Mrs. Angelo, letting her house in Carlisle Place, soon after 
moved to Rathbone Place, quite close by, to the north of Soho 
Square, and there in Upper Charlotte Street the once beautiful 
and genial hostess of King's Square Court breathed her last 
only a year or two later : — 

1805. January nth. In Rathbone Place, in her 67th year, Mrs. 

Angelo, relict of A. (sk) Angelo, Esq., Fencing Master to 
the Royal Family.^ 

Her quite informal will breathes in every line the gentle 
sweetness of her nature. It is dated 13 July, 1802, and the 
short codicil 24 May, 1804. She styles herself 'Elizabeth 
Angelo Tremamondo, of Eton, Bucks, and Carlisle Street, 
Soho.' To her 'dear daughter Florella Sophia Angelo 
Tremamondo' she leaves her estate, 'excepting £ioOy and 
£20 a year from her house in Carlisle Street for her dear 
grandson, George Frederick Angelo Tremamondo, and to him 
also his grandfather's gold watch,' and ' to his wife Elizabeth a 
diamond pin, and his daughter Mary To her 'dear 

daughter Catherine Drury her father's and sister's picture, set 
in gold, and her wedding diamond buckle ring.' To her ' dear 
daughter Ann St. Leger her ear-rings and a pin.' She desires 
' to be buried in the same grave as her dear husband, and to 
have her name inscribed on his tombstone.' Her sole executrix 
is Sophia, and the witnesses are Hester Provost and Elizabeth 
Wood. The codicil transfers Domenick's gold watch to 
Sophia, who is exhorted to give her own to George Frederick 
instead, and to help him in every way. 

^ Europ. Mag. xlii. 78. ^ G.M. Ixxv. 91. 

Elizabeth Johnson, wife of Domenick Angelo. 


No mention whatever is made of her son Henry Angelo, 
an omission eloquent of Henry's behaviour to his parents in 
their declining years, while even the affidavit, as in the case of 
Domenick*s will, is made by Henry's son, ' George Frederick 
Angelo Tremamondo and Elizabeth his wife/ 

By his wife Elizabeth, Angelo Domenick Maria Trema- 
mondo had at least six children, namely : — 

1. Henry Charles William, born 5 April, 1756. 

2. Florella Sophia, born i759- 

3. Anne Caroline Eliza, born 14 October, 1763. 

4. Catherine Elizabeth, born 27 August, 1766. 

5. Elizabeth Tremamondo, born 13 June, 1768. 

6. George Xavier Tremamondo, born 10 May, 1773. 
[There was perhaps also a son Michael, concerning whom 

we shall speak presently.] 

These last two entries differ curiously from any of the 
former. For instance, that of Elizabeth runs thus — ' 1768. 
Elizabeth Tremamondo d. of Angelo Dominico and Elizabeth 
[Tremamondo]. Bapt. June 20th. Born June 13th.' The 
child's surname is entered as "Tremamondo not Angelo, and 
Dominick's name Angelo appears in its right place, namely as 
the first of his Christian names. This child probably died 
soon after birth, as she was only seven days old when baptized, 
whereas in the case of all the other children about a month 
was allowed to elapse before baptism. Of the other children of 
Domenick Angelo and Elizabeth Johnson, his wife, we shall 
treat presently. 

Domenick Angelo, notwithstanding his large receipts 
during so many years, died in comparative poverty, and there 
is a touch of true natural feeling in his son Henry's reference 
to that circumstance as recorded in his Reminiscences, how, no 
longer affluent, he had, ^ poor man,' to labour almost to the last. 

With all his charm Domenick Angelo had certain faults 
which cannot be said to be altogether special to his race and 
country, but on the whole it must be admitted that his charac- 
ter was that of a fine, generous, noble, high-minded gentleman, 
and the following panegyric from the Gentleman's Magazine^ 
which appeared at the time of his death, he well deserved : — 

*At Eton, July nth, 1802, in his 8 1st year, A. {sic) Angelo, Esqr., sin- 
cerely lamented by his family and a large circle of friends. A truly worthy 
character. If any fault, too hospitable, too charitable for his means, which 
rendered it necessary for him to toil almost to the latest period of his life. 



His comfortable board was always spread for all comers, and the needy never 
went away unrelieved from his gate. He retained his bodily powers so well 
that he gave a lesson in fencing a few days before his death. A very respect- 
able character. Manners courtly and elegant. Well acquainted with life, 
and familiarly known to the most distinguished characters in Europe for the 
last half century. Long resident in England, respected by persons of the 
highest rank and particularly the Royal Family. In the arts of Riding and 
Fencing he was long at the head of his Profession, and by his skill in both 
brought them into general adoption as necessary branches of fashionable edu- 
cation. He understood all the continental tongues, and was altogether an 
accomplished and estimable man.' (G.M. of 1802, Ixxii. 692) 

Domenick Angelo's portrait was painted several times. In 
Sir Joshua Reynolds' portrait of his wife, she is seen to be 
wearing in a bracelet her husband's picture in miniature. That 
miniature is believed to have been a copy of his own portrait 
by Sir Joshua Reynolds. If so, then the ' Mr. Angelo ' who 
was a sitter to Sir Joshua in 1770 may have been his son 
Henry, then fourteen years old, and will perhaps be the por- 
trait reproduced for this article. Domenick's own portrait has 
been lost, and the miniature was taken to India by one of his 
descendants and lost too. He was also painted however by 
Sir William Beechey, and at Wilton, the seat of the Earl of 
Pembroke, there was an equestrian portrait of him, a pendant 
to one of the Earl, the horse by Morier and the figures by 
Brompton.^ Angelo was also immortalized (by grace of 
George II. himself) in West's famous picture, ' The Battle of 
the Boyne ' and in the equestrian statue of William III. in 
Dublin, in both which works, though the horseman's head is 
that of King William, the figure, for which he stood, is that of 
Angelo, and the charger the model of Angelo's famous white 
horse ' Monarch,' the very horse on which he displayed his 
feats of scientific horsemanship before the court of George II. 


I. * Henry Angelo,' the famous swordsman. The follow- 
ing is a copy of his baptismal certificate from St. George's 
Church, Hanover Square : — 

Baptism. — i6th May, 1766, Henry Charles William, son of Angelo 
Domenico Malevolti and Elizabeth [Malevolti]. Born 5th April, 1766. 

Three points should be observed here : (i) The orderfof 
Domenico's Christian names, ' Angelo ' appearing in its proper 

^ H. Angelo's Reminiscences. 

Elizabeth Johnson (Mrs. Domenick Angelo.) 

By Sir Joshiia Reynolds. 


place ; (2) The absence of the name Tremamondo ; and (3) 
the fact that the child is named neither Angelo nor Trema- 
mondo, but Malevolti. According to his baptismal certificate, 
in fact, ' Henry Angelo,' afterwards under that name to be so 
well known, was really Henry Charles William Malevolti. 
The name ' Angelo ' is nowhere — it was subsequently assumed, 
and Malevolti ignored. So charming an instance of the Angelo 
manner deserves recognition, and should be borne in mind. 

According to his own account in his Reminiscences his 
' Godfathers were George III. (at that time Heir Apparent), 
the late Dukes of Cumberland, York, and Kent, and the Duke 
of Gloucester,' of which fact some of his Christian names at 
least were commemorative.^ The whole of these princes were 
pupils of his father. 

He seems at first to have been intended for the navy, 
and as a matter of fact he was actually enrolled by Captain 
Augustus Hervey (Lady Hervey's second son) on the books 
of the Dragon man-of-war in the capacity of midshipman, 
thereby becoming entitled, at an extremely early age, to some 
twenty-five guineas prize-money,^ a circumstance which lends 
probability to the conjecture that the marriage at St. George's, 
Hanover Square, already noted, in 1728, between Richard 
Johnson and Elizabeth Harvey, was that of Elizabeth John- 
son's parents. 

From Dr. Rose's academy at Chiswick, Henry's first 
school, he was sent in 1764 to Eton, where his father was 
fencing-master. From Eton in 1772, in his seventeenth year, 
he went to Paris to study fencing under the renowned Motet, 
the champion pareur of the continent, and to learn French. 
For a time he lived with a M. Liviez, who had been a dancer 
and a ballet-master at Drury Lane. His wife was English, 
and he had fallen in love with her at the Percy Chapel in Char- 
lotte Street, Soho. The lady was then a spinster no longer 
young, and M. Liviez was under the impression that she 
gazed upon him from her pew with admiring looks, which 
however was by no means the case, for her principal charm 
was a squint, and she was really glancing in another direction ; 

^ They were : Edward Augustus, Duke of York, b. 1739; William Henry 
(Admiral), Duke of Gloucester, b. 1743; Henry Frederick (Admiral), Duke of 
Cumberland, b. 1745; Frederick William, b. 1750, d. 1765 ; all brothers of 
George III. 

^ Angelo's Reminiscences and Austin Dobson in Longman^s, 



notwithstanding, her figure was so admirably formed that she 
had posed as the model for Roubillac's famous figure of 
Eloquence on the Argyll tomb in the south transept of West- 
minster Abbey. On Angelo this devoted couple showered 
kindness, not even modified by seasons of hypochondria in- 
duced by too generous feeding, ' when M. Liviez would fancy 
himself Apollo, and fiddle feverishly to the Nine Muses typified 
by a circle of chairs' {Longmans^ Ap. 1898). 

Henry Angelo returned to London in 1775, and at once 
took his place in his father's academy at Soho as a finished 
maHtre d'escrime. In 1778, in his twenty-third year, he 
married a beautiful north country girl named Mary Bowman 
Swindon, and the following is a copy of their marriage certi- 
ficate at St. Ann's, Soho : — 

Marriage. — Henry Angelo of this Parish, and Mary Bowman Swindon 
of the Parish of West Aukland in the County of Durham, were married in 
this Church by Licence, B.L., the 23rd day of October, 1778, by me, John 
Jefferson, Curate. 

This marriage was solemnized between us : — 

Henry Angelo. 

Mary Bowman Swindon. 

In the presence of us : — 

Is^. Taylor.^ 

C[atherine] Angelo. [Sister.] 

In 1785 he took over his father's Fencing Academy in 
Carlisle Street, and later on moved to the Opera House 
buildings at the corner of the Haymarket, ' almost facing the 
Orange Coffee House,' then a favourite resort of foreigners of 
all sorts and conditions. His skill was unrivalled, he had 
public and scholastic appointments, and the list of his ' Own 
Boastings,' of his pupils of noble and professional rank, who 
frequented his school is a most imposing one. In 18 13 he 
was appointed naval instructor in the use of the cutlass, in- 
troducing much-needed reforms, as his father in the British 
cavalry, and his cousin Anthony in the Bengal cavalry, had 
similarly introduced reforms as greatly needed. We read that 
* previous to the year 1 8 1 3 our sailors in boarding used the 

1 This was Isaac Taylor (i 759-1 829) of a famous family of artists and 
engravers. He was the son of Isaac Taylor (1730— 1807), the original illus- 
trator of Sir Charles Grandison, and the friend of Bartolozzi, Bewick, Richard 
Smirke, Fuseli, Goldsmith, Garrick and the Angelos. His son was Isaac 
Taylor (iii.) (1787-1865), artist, author and inventor. This gifted family 
came of a Worcestershire stock {D.N.B.). 


cutlass after any fashion they pleased. It was suggested how- 
ever that this was a defect, and with a view to repairing it 
Clapperton and a few other clever midshipmen were ordered 
to repair to Portsmouth dockyard to be instructed by the 
celebrated swordsman Angelo/ ^ 

In 1789 Angelo's school was burnt down, and he appears 
to have moved to Old Bond Street (living at Bolton Row), 
and there he estabhshed another school, of which his son, a 
second Henry, took over charge in 18 17. Then in a certain 
year undefined, save by the phrase 'the year of Kean's benefit,' 
perhaps 1827, he strained his left thigh, when that celebrated 
actor and himself were fencing together, and was thenceforth 
compelled to * bid adieu to the practical exertions of the 
science.' His remaining days he spent ' in the enjoyment of 
a small annuity ' at some village, the name of which I have 
not ascertained, somewhere near Bath, that city which his 
father Domenick in his purple prime, when he was pro- 
verbially known as ' one of the most elegant men of the age, 
the gayest of the gay,' used to visit from time to time in the 
sacred days of Beau Nash. There poor Henry Angelo prob- 
ably died about the year 1839 and in (about) the 83rd year 
of his age. 

Like his father Domenick, Henry Angelo lived constantly 
in the society of painters and actors. Like Domenick too 
he had a pretty fancy in drawing, and his portrait at four- 
teen or fifteen, reproduced for this article, represents him 
before his drawing-board, crayon in hand. He had learnt 
from Bartolozzi and Cipriani. With Rowlandson too he 
had been intimate from boyhood. He knew him in Paris, 
he accompanied him to Portsmouth to see the ghastly landing 
of the French prisoners of war after Lord Howe's victory, 
and he followed his hearse to the grave in 1827. 

Jack Bannister the actor was another of Henry Angelo's 
special friends, at whose benefits at Drury Lane he occasionally 
appeared in character, notably as Mrs. Cole in Foote's Minor at 
the Italian Opera House in 1 792. He also acted before the Royal 
Family at Windsor as Papillon in Tbe Lyar, also by Foote, an 
occasion which he further signalized * by particular desire ' with 
' A Solo Duet, or Ballad Singers in Cranbourn Alley.' The 

^ G.M. 1828, No. 98, p. 569. 



boards of Lord Barrymore's theatre were also graced on occa- 
sion by Henry Angelo, his favourite character being Lady 
Pentweazle in Footers Taste. Nor did his professional en- 
gagements prevent him from sometimes joining Barrymore in 
his extravagances, whether ' at places like Jacob's Well, or 
driving with him through Colnbrook, when his sportive lord- 
ship would " fan the daylights " — in other words, break the 
windows right and left with his whip/ ^ Angelo was also a 
member of the Pic-nic Society, inaugurated by Lady Bucking- 
hamshire, the name of which suggested the title of Angela's 
Pic-nic. Again we find him contributing to the dramatic dis- 
plays at Brandenburgh House in Hammersmith, the house of 
Lord Berkeley's sister, that Margravine of Anspach whose 
comedy of the Sleeper-walker^ as Austin Dobson notes, was 
printed by Walpole at the Strawberry Hill Press. Anon he 
is again with Barrymore at Brighton, under the windows of 
the Pavilion, serenading Mrs. Fitzherbert of Swynnerton, the 
morganatic spouse of the Fourth George. A joyous com- 
panion wherever he was, keen at his business, but not less 
keen to share in the extravagant caprices, in the masculine 
pleasures, of the ' strong generation ' of the time of the Re- 

Many are the anecdotal treasures stored away in Angelo's 
unsorted jumble of reminiscences, and most difficult it is to 
bring order out of his dateless higgledy-piggledy pages. Per- 
haps those relating to old Soho are as interesting as any, and 
therefore to save myself the trouble which I have no mind 
for, and to oblige the reader, which I mostly desire, I make 
use of the following excellent samples of some of them, 
gathered and transmuted by no unskilful hand : — 

Many Soho localities, familiar to residents nowadays from more prosaic 
associations, take an old-world colour and romance from the pen of Henry 
Angelo, or rather from the pen of W. H. Pyne, if it be true that he was the 
actual writer of the Reminicences. The conflagration of the Pantheon in 
Oxford Street, for instance, must have been a magnificent spectacle, though 
we really cannot credit the assertion that the glare in the heavens was dis- 
cernible by travellers upon Salisbury Plain. Mr. and Mrs. Siddons, standing 
at the window in their night habiliments, would in themselves give unusual 
interest to a modern Soho fire. The night was one of the coldest of the cen- 
tury, and next morning icicles, lo or 15 feet long, testified to the exertions 
of the firemen of 1789 to save young Wyatt's architectural masterpiece from 

^ Longman* Sf Ap., 1898. 

Harry Angelo, son of Domenick Angei.o and 
Elizabeth Johnson. 

Painted in iy6g (? by Sir Joshua Reynolds). 


All who have been admirers of the famous Bach Passion Services at 
St. Anne's, Soho, for the past five and twenty years would like to know how 
the master's youngest son (a sad declension from the original Sebastian) strutted 
through Soho during the later decades of the eighteenth century, enjoying 
good dinners and making bad jokes in a species of German-English jargon. 
He is shown us at Carlisle House playing the accompaniment as the gentle 
Mrs. Angelo trilled a song of his composing.^ At another time, his fine 
musical ear distracted by the discord which Gainsborough is making upon Mrs. 
Angelo's harpsichord, he good humouredly pushes the great painter off" the 
stool, and, the immortal genius of his race flaming up in his grosser earthly 
tenement, the misused keys thunder and wail forth majestic voluntaries, as 
though the fat player were inspired. Gainsborough thought himself as gifted 
in music as in painting, and Bach, once calling upon him at his studio, found 
the creator of ^ The Duchess of Devonshire ' blowing hard on the bassoon. 
* Do listen to the rich bass ! ' exclaimed Gainsborough. * Pote it away, man, 
pote it away,' was the answer, * it is only fit for the lungs of a blackschmidt. 
Py all the powers, it is just for all the vorld as the veritable praying of a 
jackass. And your clarionet, baw, baw, 'tis as a duck ; 'tis vorse as a 
goose ! ' 

The Angelos were very fond of Sir Joshua Reynolds, who lived in Leices- 
ter Square. As we mentioned, he painted Mrs. Angelo's portrait. Henry 
considers that Reynolds made his way as an artist by sheer merit, quite un- 
countenanced by the royal favour and lofty patronage in which Gainsborough 
was so fortunate. 

Richmond Buildings, about a hundred yards from the Angelos' front door, 
was the abode of that singular person Home Tooke. He was wont to amuse 
his neighbour, old Mr. Sheridan of Frith Street, by singing a not over re- 
spectful version of * God save the King.' Angelo pere, in consideration of the 
kindnesses which he, as a foreigner, had received from the English royal family, 
would not permit the exhibition of this parody of Tooke's under his own 
loyal roof. 

Continual glimpses were caught, in the Soho of that era, of the strange 
genius George Morland, one of the greatest English landscape painters of all 
time, who migrated from Paddington to Frith Street, and whose fortunes and 
abilities declined as his besetting sin of drunkenness got him more completely 
in its grip. Angelo recollects the tremendous vogue of the series of rural pic- 
tures called * The Weary Sportsman,' when the precocious artist (he dressed in 
buckskin boots and a tail coat at the age of thirteen) was quite a boy. 

Rowlandson, the admirable illustrator of Dr. Syntax, was another friend of 
Angelo, who himself took lessons in drawing from Bartolozzi of Broad Street. 
Rowlandson was knocked down and plundered, just after Henry had left him, 
one night in Poland Street. His own assailant he never detected, but curiously 
enough, on a visit to a police office in Litchfield Street, Rowlandson was able 
to identify by description a man who had recently robbed a gentleman in 
Soho Square. This fellow was subsequently hanged, a fact of which his dis- 
coverer was very proud. 

No more extraordinary incident is recounted by Angelo, nor is there any 

^ The song referred to was one entitled * Patie ' ; words by Allan Ramsay 



tale of which he more emphatically asserts the truth, than his statement that 
he one evening met, at the corner of New Compton Street, a strange young 
woman, meanly attired, who was so famished that she voraciously devoured 
some biscuits he gave her, but who in after years became the brilliant and 
fascinating Lady Hamilton, the society queen of Naples, and enshrined (not 
altogether nobly) in the annals of English history as the friend of Horatio 
Nelson. There appears no reason to doubt the narrator's word, and surely of 
all Soho romances this is the most remarkable. Angelo hardly ever saw the for- 
lorn maiden again to speak to, but he found out that she was a certain Emma 
Hart, who had been servant to a lady of his acquaintance, and who had left 
her situation through grief at the demise of her young master, whom she had 
devotedly nursed. 

From house to house in Soho Square Angelo watched the elder Sheridan 
and other sympathizers with the unfortunate Dr. Dodd, calling with pens and 
parchments in their hands and ink-bottles in their button-holes, to solicit 
signatures for the royal pardon of this most accomplished and popular forger. 
The amount of sympathy elicited in this case in 1777 was extraordinary. The 
moral Dr. Johnson, and about a hundred thousand other friends, did their 
best to persuade the king to save the eloquent preacher and voluminous writer 
from the death penalty. George III. was specially incensed because the doc- 
tor had tried to buy the living of St. George's, Hanover Square, for 3,000, 
and Dr. Dodd could only obtain the privilege of being conveyed to Tyburn, 
in consideration of his profession and attainments, in a mourning coach instead 
of the ordinary cart. Mrs. Angelo, overcome with emotion, had to leave the 
Soho dinner table the night before he was hung. Henry tells us that, from 
the windows of Carlisle House, he could see the criminals going along Oxford 
Road to Tyburn ; but on this important occasion he made one of a party to 
view the distinguished execution under the fatal tree. 

Two of a trade, as Henry remarks, do not always agree ; but he was very 
fond of a fellow fencing master called Lapiere. Their pupils often interchanged 
bouts, and it was a great shock to him to call at his friend's house one day, in 
Gerrard Street, and to find that he had cut his throat. He had been de- 
feated by a rival in his profession, and the catastrophe was supposed to have 
preyed upon his mind. Poor Lapiere is buried in St. Anne's Churchyard. 

One of the very few personal details the younger Angelo gives us about 
himself is that, in the year 1802, his success as a fencing-master justified him 
in engaging a spacious apartment in the neighbourhood of the Mansion House. 
Here, by his own account, he not only did a good deal of profitable business, 
but dispensed much hospitality in return for the elegant entertainments with 
which he had been honoured at the first tables of the wealthy city of London. 
It is curious how often one is impressed with the conviction, in reading his 
Reminiscences y that the combined blood of the Malevoltis and Tremamondos, 
of which we hear so much in his father's genealogy, did not succeed, at any 
rate in the person of Henry himself, in producing quite a gentleman. How- 
ever, he says that his broiled beefsteak and bottle of old port, served in what he 
terms his attic, have lost many a Lord Mayor's banquet a distinguished guest. 
This may be true enough ; there is a good deal to be said in favour of a well 
grilled steak and (for a sound liver) a bottle of old port. 

One of Henry Angelo's crowning mercies was Lord Byron, the real live 
poet. He was accustomed to go to the Albany every day at noon, to do his 


best to keep down, by regular and tolerably violent exercise, an unromantic 
tendency to avoirdupois with which the bard was threatened. The author of 
Childe Harold can hardly have looked a poetic object as he engaged at baguette 
a la main, which he preferred to the foils, as it was not so awkward for his 
lame foot. He put on a thick flannel jacket, and over it a pelisse lined with 
fur tied round with a Turkish towel ; a memory perhaps of the Bride of 
Abydos. After a sharp bout he would send for his valet to rub him down. 
Angelo tells us, with especial pride, how on one occasion Lord Byron called 
to him from his carriage at Newmarket, drove him to Cambridge, entertained 
him royally, and finally handed him up a bumper of old St. John's ale to the 
top of the coach that was to convey him back to London, at the same time 
taking off his hat. We could not bid farewell to the younger Angelo under 
any happier condition than that of Lord Byron taking off his hat to him.^ 

Henry Angelo's publications were: — 

(1) Reminiscences y 2 vols., 1828 and 1830. 

(2) Angela's Pic-Nic^ 1834, with a frontispiece by George 


(3) A translation in smaller form of his father's UEcole 

des Armes. This ' translation ' was made by Rowland- 
son the artist, and the book was afterwards incor- 
porated under the head ' Escrime ' in the Encyclopedie 
of Diderot and d'Alembert. 

(4) Twenty plates in the use of the Hungarian and High- 

land broadsword, which were designed by Rowland- 
son and put forth in 1798 by T. Egerton of the 
Military Library, Whitehall, ^ the adventurous pub- 
lisher who subsequently issued the first three novels 
of Jane Austen.'^ 
Henry Angelo also made a very magnificent screen for 
Lord Byron, having on one side all the most celebrated pugi- 
lists, and on the other all the greatest actors. Mr. John 
Murray of Albemarle St. is said to be the happy possessor of 
this historic screen at the present time. 

Of the sons of Henry Angelo two of them received 
direct commissions from the Duke of York, the Commander- 
in-Chief, one of Henry's godfathers, and their own.^ 

(i) George Frederick, eldest son, whose baptismal cer- 
tificate from St. Ann's Church, Soho, runs as follows : — 

^ Parish Magazine of St. Ann's, Soho, for April, 1902 (by kind permission 
of the rector, the Rev. J. H. Cardwell). 

2 Longman' Sy Ap. 1898. 

3 The Duke of York was godfather to two of the sons of Henry Angelo 
(i .) {Reminiscences) . 



Baptism. — 1779. Born July 10. George Frederick Angelo Tremamondo, 
son of Henry Charles William Angelo and Mary. Baptized August 6th. 

As well as of the Duke of York, he was a protege of the 
Prince Regent, afterwards George IV., and in 1794 was offered 
a commission as Lieutenant in the 31st Light Dragoons. 
Declining this in the hope of better civil employment, he 
became clerk to His Royal Highness the Prince Frederick, the 
Commander-in-Chief at the Horse Guards, in 1797, holding 
as"! well a commission in the 1 6th Reserve Battalion (Ireland), 
conferred on him ' by His Royal Highness* command,' to 
which he was gazetted ensign on 9 June, 1804. He was 
promoted to a lieutenancy in the Royal West Indian Rangers 
in June, 1807, and became captain on 20 January, 18 14. 
But it is to be noted that he never joined his regiments and 
never served with the colours, being seconded all the time of 
his service as being employed exclusively at Head Quarters 
by the Commander-in-Chief/ His appointment in the Army 
he resigned in 1 8 1 8, but was only allowed the value of his 

In 1 82 1 he retired from his civil appointment as clerk to 
the Commander-in-Chief on a pension of i^y^o a year.^ His 
papers at the Record Office include interesting testimony from 
his uncle (by marriage). General William St. Leger, Mr. Wind- 
ham, Secretary for War, and General W. Winyard, as well as a 
special reference to the Prince of Wales' favour and goodwill 
towards him. 

In his retirement he lived at Hill House, Southampton. 
His wife, whom he is said to have married in 1801, was 
named Elizabeth McCoy, and she died in 18 17 : — 

Death. — 18 17, Jan. 5. In Carmarthen, St. Fitzroy Square, the wife 
of Capt. Angelo of the West India Rang.xS {GM. vol. 87, p. 91). 

He had two sons, John Angelo who died young, and 
William St. Leger Angelo who died unmarried. Also two 
daughters, Elizabeth born in 1 804, who married on 1 8 October, 
1 83 1, the Rev. John Dayman of Mamsbury, North Devon, 
and who died 17 November, 1875 ; Sophie Angelo, who 
married Captain Edwin Rich.* 

Marriage. — At Kingston, near Portsmouth, Captain Edwin Rich, R.N., 
son of the late Sir Charles Rich, Bart., of Shirley House, Hants, to Sophia, young- 

1 Memoranda Papers at the Record Office. 

2 Ibid. 3 Ibid. 
* Family Evidences, 


est daughter of Capt. G. F. Angelo, of Hill House, Southampton (G. M. 1829, 
P- 74)- 

Captain George Frederick Angelo, who is said to have died 
in 1836, married a second wife, and the following extract from 
a letter of a member of the Angelo family refers to her : — 

Miss Jane Dayman used to visit Elizabeth, the second wife and widow of 
George Frederick Angelo {Family Notes). 

William St. Leger Angelo^ the surviving son of George 
Frederick Angelo, was born in the year 1812, and on 
the death of his father in 1836 was gazetted an ensign in 
the Royal African Colonial Corps, stationed at Sierra 
Leone, on 20 May, 1836, and he sailed in the ensuing 
October, joining the corps in September.^ That corps 
shortly afterwards seems to have been disbanded, and 
William St. Leger Angelo was transferred as lieutenant 
to the 3rd West India Regiment, then newly raised.^ 
In 1845 he was gazetted captain in the same corps,^ 
and in 1850 he died, as witness the following announce- 
ment : — 

Death. — 1850, May ist. Aged 38. Captain William St. Leger Angelo, 
of the 3rd West India Regiment. {GM. vol. 34, p. loi) 

(2) Henry Angelo (11.) — ' On October 14th, 1852, died at 
Brighton, aged 72, Henry Angelo, Esq., Superintendent of 
Sword Exercise to the Army.' * 

Henry Angelo (II.) must therefore have been the second 
son of Henry Angelo (L), and born in 1780 or 1781. Like 
his father and grandfather he was brought up as a Mattre 
d'Escrime^ and carried on and upheld the famous school of mas- 
ters founded by Domenick. He took over charge of the 
Academy from his father in 18 17, and in 1830 moved it to St. 
James' Street. Among his many pupils there were the King of 
Hanover and the present Duke of Cambridge. In 1833 
was appointed Superintendent of Sword Exercise to the Army, 
a post which he held to the last.^ 

In his brief informal will at Somerset House he styles 
himself Henry Angelo of Upper Wimpole Street. He 
leaves all his effects to his ' wife, Mary Ann Angelo.' 

1 Memoranda Papers at the Record Office. 

2 Jrmy List. a Ibid. 
* G.M. vol. 38, p. 543. 5 Ibid. 



His wife here mentioned is said to have been a daughter of 
General Heathcote, and died in Wimpole Street/ Charles 
Henry Angelo is described in the Gentleman s Magazine ^ as 
* sociable and amiable in private life, endearing himself to all.* 
One of his contemporaries also writes of him : * Henry (11.) 
seemed to me a model man — in stature, mien, looks, dress 
and in manners too.' With such a tribute we may safely 
leave him to his repose in Kensal Green. 

He was succeeded by his son Henry Angelo (IIL), or in 
full, Henry Charles Angelo^ as to whose career I possess little 
more than the following extract : — 

Marriage. — 26th December, 1832, Henry Charles Angelo, Batchelor, to 
Elizabeth Mary Bungay, Spinster, a Minor, of Brighthelmstone, Sussex. 

To him Dame Sophie Angelo in 1847 left the interest of 
her house in Carlisle Street, Soho Square — the old Carlisle 
House, the home of glorious old Domenick, and he too it 
must have been who, as Charles Henry Angelo, published 
The Bayonet Exercise in 1853. He is stated to have left four 
sons : (i) Charles Heathcote Angelo, who emigrated to Aus- 
tralia ; (2) Arthur Angelo, a protege of Lord Frederick Fitz 
Clarence and General Yorke, who was born on 23 March, 
1836, was gazetted ensign in the 6th Foot on 13 October, 
1854, and lieutenant in the 74th on 15 January, 1858. He 
retired by sale of his commission on 5 March, 1861, and went 
to New Zealand^; (3) Michael Angelo, born 12 January, 
1838, a clerk in the War Office (1855-72)* ; and (4) Stewart 
Angelo, who emigrated to and is now settled in New Zealand ; 
and one daughter, the wife of a distinguished officer, still living. 

With Henry Angelo (III.)) deceased about 1854, the 
famous Angelo School of Masters came to an end. 

(3) Edward Anthony Angelo, the third son, who also 
received a direct commission from H.R.H. the Duke of 
York. This officer had a most distinguished and varied 
career, having been, apparently, in almost everything that was 
going. He entered the army as an ensign in the 28th Regi- 
ment on 9 July, 1 803, so that (supposing he was then sixteen) 

^ Family Evidences. 

2 Vol. 38. 

3 Memo. Papers at the Record Office. 

4 Harry Abercrombie Angelo was also for a time a clerk in the War Office 
( 1 874-5). He was a son of Colonel John Angelo of Mussoorie, and perished 
i n the Burma War of 1886 (see infra). 


he must have been born in or about 1787. He was gazetted 
a lieutenant in the 52nd Regiment on 28 August, 1804, an 
army captain on i December, 1806, and a regimental captain 
on 14 May, 1807/ He became major on 2 June, 18 14, and 
lieut.-colonel on 22 July, 1830,^ and finally a colonel in the 
army, being then of the 30th Foot, on 22 December, 1847.^ 
On 12 December, 1834, he went on half-pay.* He served 
with the expedition to Egypt in 1807, on the coast of Cala- 
bria in 1808, with the expedition to Walcheren in 1809, with 
the army to Catalonia in 18 12 and 18 13, he was adjutant- 
general attached to the British-Austrian army, he acted as 
A.D.C. to General Nugent in the campaign against Eugene 
Beauharnais the Viceroy of Italy, he was present at the siege 
and capture of Trieste, Cattaro and Ragusa, and was conspic- 
uous in various other services in the Adriatic.^ 

Besides his services when posted to the regiments already 
noted, he served much in the 21st Foot, and was repeatedly 
mentioned in despatches. Thus in his despatch dated Trieste, 
13 October, 18 14, Admiral Freemantle mentions 'Captain 
Angelo of the 2 1 st Foot as foremost in showing where to 
place fascines to protect the men, whilst the gun was getting 
up.' ^ Again, when off Ragusa, Captain Hoste, R.A., makes 
special mention of ' the assistance rendered by Captain Angelo 
of General Campbell's Staff in the capture of the place.' ^ 

In 1818, being then brevet-major in the 21st Foot, he 
published a letter on the administration of the Ionian Islands.^ 

Among other appointments held by him was that of Army 
Instructor in Sword Exercise under the Duke of Wellington, 
showing that he also had inherited the quick eye and the cool 
judgment of his fathers.^ 

In 1827 he was made a Military Knight of Hanover,^^ and 
in 1839 appointment of Chief Commissioner of 

Police for Bolton on a salary of £^00 a year.^^ Lastly he 
became a Knight of Windsor in 1854. He survived in 
honourable retirement till 1869, when he died at Windsor 
Castle on 26 August,^^ being then about eighty years of age. 

1 Jrmy List, 1 8 1 o. 
3 G.M. vol. 27, p. 76. 
5 Ibid. 
^ Ibid. 

9 GM. vol. 38. 

" G.M. new ser. vol. 12, p. 419. 

2 Ibid. 

* Army Lisf, 1845. 

« G.M. (18 14) vol. 84, p. 79. 

8 Copy in B.M. 
10 Biog. Diet. B.M. 
12 Biog. Diet. B.M. 




In 1 8 16 Colonel A. Angelo had married — having run 
away with his youthful bride — a daughter of the Marquis de 

Marriage. — nth July, 1816, Major Angelo, 21st Regiment, to Pauline,, 
daughter to the Marquis de Choiseul (G.M. 18 16, p. 176). 

It is somewhat remarkable and not a little suspicious, de- 
noting a princely wigging from his godfather the Commander- 
in-Chief, that immediately after this marriage he was gazetted 
to the Newfoundland Fencibles and reduced to half-pay : '9th 
Sept. 1 8 16, Edward Anthony Angelo, a Major of the New- 
foundland Fencibles, placed on the half-pay List.*^ But what- 
ever the breeze, and it probably was due to a complaint from 
the Marquis of Choiseul, it soon blew over, and he was again 
restored to his beloved 21st. 

As a pendant to his own marriage, the following announce- 
ment is apropos : — 

Marriage. — ^April, 18 17. At Paris, the Comte de Choiseul, Aide-de-Camp- 
to the Duke of Berry, to the Hon. Maria Charlotte Parkyns, youngest daughter 
to the late Lord Raucliffe (Dodsley^s Annual Register). 

The Comte de Choiseul was probably Mrs. Angelo's brother. 

Of the marriage of Colonel Edward Anthony Angelo and 
Pauline de Choiseul there was issue one son (at least) and 
three daughters : — 

Edward Augustus Angelo, the son, appears in the Army List 
as having been gazetted on 10 November, 1843, 
sign in the loth Foot, then serving at Meerut. Whether 
he joined in India or remained at the dep6t at home I 
do not know,^ but on 15 January, 1845, Lord Ripon^ 
President of the Board of Directors, on the recommen- 
dation of Earl de Gray, who certified that he was well 
acquainted with his family, character and connections 
gave him an East Indian cadetship, and on * January 
24th, 1845, E. A. Angelo of the Bengal Infantry, was 
sent to Bengal, via Marseilles.' On his arrival at Cal- 
cutta he was posted to the 22 nd Native Infantry, then 
stationed at Barrackpore, but he declined to accept the 

* Army List. 

a At the time of his nomination he was apparently in India : * Augustus Ed- 
ward Angelo nominated when an ensign in H.M. loth Regiment in Bengal' 
{India Office Records).^ 


appointment, and returned to England. On 23 July 
his father wrote from the United Service Club to the 
Earl of Ripon to report his unexpected return, and to 
surrender his cadetship again into his lordship's hands. 
His rank as ensign was cancelled on 28 November, 

Colonel Angelo's three daughters by his wife Pauline, 
namely Georgina, Matilda and Bertha Angelo, still survive, 
and reside in Paris.^ 

(4) William Henry Angelo was the fourth son of 
Henry Angelo (I.) He must have been born in or about 
1789, and he died in 1855. 

Death. — ^Jan. 19th, 1855. At Brompton, aged 66, William Henry 
Angelo, Esq. (G.M. vol. 43, p. 332). 

He is said to have married a lady named Cope, and to have 
had issue another William Angelo.^ Of his career all we 
know is that for a time he was settled at Oxford, where he 
kept a fencing school. Subsequently he became the manager 
of his brother's and nephew's academy in St. James's Street. 
He is the ' Old William ' whom many will still remember, an 
excellent master of fence, even to the last, when, in consequence 
of an injury, his weapon had to be bound to his hand. 

His will at Somerset House is dated 22 August, 1840, and 
it was proved 2 March, 1855. In it he styles himself ' William 
Angelo, otherwise William Henry Angelo, formerly of Oxford, 
and of 21 Hill Street, Westminster, fencing master.' His 
* wife, Elizabeth Sarah Angelo,' to whom he left his estate, was 
sole executrix. 

I think it just possible also that the child mentioned in the 
following announcement may have been a son of Henry : — 

Burial. — 1794, March lOth. James Angelo, a child of five months from 
Prince's Court, Soho. Died of convulsions. (St. AntCs Registers) 

[2. Michael Angelo. There is a suspicious gap of some 
four or five years between the dates of birth of Sophia Angelo 
and Anne Caroline Angelo, between 1758 and 1763, and it is 
possible that Domenick had a second son Michael born in that 
interval, and that he is the youthful author mentioned in the 
following quotation : — 

^ India Office Records. 
2 Family Evidences. 
* Family Notes. 



The Drawing School for little Masters and Misses. To which are added the 
Whole Art of Kite-making, and the Author"* s new Discoveries in the Preparation 
of Water Colours. By Master Michael Angelo. Dedicated to H.R.H. 
Prince Edward. 1774. Price 6d. 

This is the title page of a small duodecimo in the British 
Museum, which is introduced by a frontispiece of little Prince 
Edward in a frame/ Domenick we know had a taste for 
painting, and Henry his eldest son, who was in Paris when 
this booklet was published, had been a pupil of Bartolozzi. 
But I have not succeeded in finding ' Master Michael's ' bap- 
tismal certificate, which may possibly be at St. Giles-in-the- 
Fields — forbidden ground at present (excepting on payment 
of preposterous search-fees) to the literary inquirer. 

On the other hand Michael may have been a son of 
Leonard Tremamondo, though that alternative is unlikely, as 
Leonard is understood never to have married.] 

3. Florella Sophia Angelo Tremamondo was born as we 
have seen in 1759, but I have not succeeded in finding her bap- 
tismal register. A pretty brunette, educated abroad, and very 
accomplished, she was a contemporary of the young Prince of 
Wales, afterwards George IV., who conceived a very high 
esteem for her, and to whose friendship she owed it that she 
was made a Dame of Eton while still under twenty, which 
gave her an assured position, a house, and an income, and, I 
suspect, in her case, frequent non-residence. She lived to a 
good old age, and at Eton she died, never having married : — 

Death. — April 7th, 1847. At Eton College, aged 88, Mrs. Sophia An- 
gelo. She was the oldest and most celebrated Dame of Eton, having been 
connected with that establishment near seventy years.2 

The following is an abstract of her will. She mentions : — 

My nephew Henry Angelo son of my brother Henry. 
To Henry's wife she leaves diamonds, etc., etc. 

To their son Henry Charles Angelo her interest in her house in Carlisle 
St., Soho, etc. 

To her niece Levina, wife of the Rev. John Dayman, Rector of Shelton. 
Cumberland, the bulk of her estate, lease of the house at Eton which she has 
of the Provost and Fellows, and makes her residuary legatee. 

To her dear niece Sophie, wife of General Wood, j^zoo and presents 
(pictures, etc). 

To dear [niece] Eliza Harnage 200 and presents. 

^ Prince Edward (b. 1767), then only seven years old, afterwards Duke of 
Kent, became the father of Queen Victoria. 
^ G.M. xxvii. 561. 


To Eliza's sister Harriet ^£200 and the picture of testatrix' sister St. 
Leger, etc. 

To dear Mrs. Arthur Drury 200, etc., etc. 

(JVill at Somerset House). 

4. Anne Caroline Eliza. Her baptismal certificate at 
St. Ann's, Soho, runs as follows : — 

Baptism. — 1763, November loth. Baptized Anne Caroline Eliza Angelo, 
d. of Domenico and Elizabeth [Angelo]. Born Oct. 1 4. 

This lady, like her sister Sophie, was educated abroad. 
^ During the long holidays when I was a school-boy [at Eton] 
my father and mother took my two eldest sisters to place 
them in a convent in French Flanders, the Ursulines at 
Lisle.' ^ 

Accomplished and captivating, as may be inferred from her 
portrait, she married in 1785, in her twenty-second year. Cap- 
tain William St. Leger, of the 17 th Dragoons, at St. Ann's 
Church, Soho. 

Marriage. — William St. Leger, Esq., of this Parish, and Caroline Ann 
Angelo of this Parish also, were married in this Church by Licence, B. L., 
the 29th day of July, 1785, by me John Jefferson, Curate. 
This marriage was solemnized between us : — 

Wm. St. Leger. 
Caroline Ann Angelo. 

In the presence of us : — 

D. Angelo Tremamondo. 
Leonardo Tremamondo. 
S[ophia] Angelo. 

With this certificate may be compared the following ex- 
tract : — 

Marriage. — 1785. Lately Captain St. Leger ^ of the 17th Regiment of 
Dragoons to Miss A. Angelo.^ 

Mrs. St. Leger lost her husband in 18 18, and the fol- 
lowing is a copy of his monumental inscription in Marylebone 
parish church : — 

Lt. General William St. Leger who began his military life at the age of 16 
in the 17th Light Dragoons then serving in America. He highly distin- 
guished himself and obtained Public Thanks. He also served honourably in 
Europe and Asia. Died 28 March 1818, aged 58. 

^ Angelo's Pic-nic. 

^ He was a son of Colonel St. Leger, one of the original subscribers 
to Domenick's VEcole des Armes in 1764. 
3 GM, Iv. 664. 



Mrs. St. Leger survived him many years, dying in 1833, 
having had one son and five daughters.^ 

5. Catherine Elizabeth, Domenico's third daughter, was 
born in 1766, and baptized also- at St. Ann's, Soho Square. 

Baptism. — 1766. Sept. 8, baptized Catherine Elizabeth Angelo d. of 
Domenick and Elizabeth [Angelo]. Born Aug. 27. 

Doubtless she was educated in a convent abroad like her 
elder sisters. She was the beauty of the family, and a sitter 
to Sir Joshua Reynolds (portrait). She fell to an English 
clergyman, to Mark Drury, Second Master at Harrow, whose 
brother, the Rev. Dr. Joseph Drury, was then Head Master, 
and the following is a copy of her marriage register : — 

The Rev. Mark Drury ^ of Harrow, co. Middlesex, and Catherine Angelo 
of this parish were married in this Church by Licence, B. L., the i6th day 
of August, 1 790, by me John Jefferson, Curate. 

This marriage was solemnized between us : — 

M. Drury. 
Catherine Angelo. 

In the presence of : — 

Dom'^° Angelo. 
Sophie Angelo. 
Charlotte GooDSOtJ. 


With this certificate we should compare the following ex- 
tract : — 

Marriage. — Rev. Mark Drury, Second Master of Harrow School, to Miss 
Catherine Angelo of Carlisle St.* 

Catherine Drury is stated to have died on 28 November, 
1825, aged 59, leaving by her husband, who is said to have 
died in 1827, one surviving child, a daughter, Eliza Drury, 
who married in 1830 Edward Harnage (who was born in 
1798 and died in 1861), third son of Sir George Harnage, 
first baronet, of Belswardyne, Salop.^ 

1 Family Evidences, 

^ A Lady Drury had a house in Dean Street, Soho, in 1762 (Rate Books). 

^ This of course is the celebrated Home Tooke, to whom Mr. W. Tooke, 
of Watton, Norfolk, and of the Temple, London, presented his own name 
Tooh and a valuable estate in consequence of the then Mr. Home's strenuous 
exertions against the policy which lost us our American colonies. 

* G.M. (1790), Ix. 858. 

5 Family Evidences, 

General William St Leger as a 
Captain in the 17TH Dragoons. 

BORN 1759. DIED 1818. 


Catherine Drury*s picture by Sir Joshua Reynolds was 
-sold by her descendant Mrs. Wayne, and is now in the col- 
lection of Lord Rothschild. 

6 and 7. The other known children of Domenick Angelo, 
namely, George Xavier Tremamondo and Elizabeth 
Tremamondo, have been already briefly noticed. 

George's baptismal register at St. Ann's, Soho, runs as 
follows : — 

1773. Baptized June 13, George Xavier Tremamondo, s. of Angelo 
Dominico and Elizabeth [Tremamondo]. Born May 10. 

The story of his life I do not know, but I imagine that he 
died early. <j^'tJb 

of James Tremamondo of Leghorn, was born, as we have seen, 
on 4 December, 1 720, his godfather having been John Simondio. 
I suppose him to have been the second brother mentioned by 
Henry Angelo. He says in his Reminiscences : ' There were 
four brothers all dead in 1 829.'^ It is not at all impossible, as I 
have already intimated, that Francis Xavier was really the John 
Xavier Tremamondo who flourished in Edinburgh from 1763 
to 1805, and that under that name he followed Domenick to 
England some time between 1753 and 1759. reason 
for that suspicion is to be found in the various announcements 
of the Edinburgh Tremamondo's death, wherein it is clearly 
stated that when John Xavier of Edinburgh died on 1 6 March, 
1805, he was eighty-four years of age, which he could not 
have been within three or four years if he had been the real 
John Xavier (who was a younger brother), but which he would 
have been with just three months and twelve days to spare if 
he had been Francis Xavier. To Englishmen of the middle 
of the eighteenth century the name Francis Xavier would 
have a decidedly unpleasant flavour, reminiscent of Jesuits 
and of Goa where St. Francis Xavier laboured and was en- 
tombed, and where the Inquisition had been so busy at work. 
Men had not yet got over the memories of '45, it was the 
age of the 'Catholic Riots,' and that thought may have 
weighed on the mind of Francis Xavier Tremamondo, and it 
would have been quite in the Angelo manner if he had cor- 
rected the flavour by substituting the name of his younger 

1 Vol. ii. 496. 


brother for his own, granting always that it was he and not 
the younger brother, the real John, who had joined Domenick: 
in London. Setting aside that hypothesis however, in defer- 
ence to the terms of the last will and testament of John 
Xavier Tremamondo of Edinburgh (to be quoted presently), 
we must conclude on more mature reflection that Francis 
Xavier remained abroad if in the meantime he had not died. 
In that case his history is a blank, unless it was he who is 
alleged to have found employment at the Court of Turin. 
We are informed that there was an ' Angelo Tremamondo ' 
(how delightfully Anglesque the vagueness !) who was ap- 
pointed Master of the Horse to Maurice of Savoy, son of 
King Charles Emmanuel III., by Letters Patent, dated Turin, 
5 July, 1776, and the original instrument is stated to be still 
in the possession of one of the descendants of John Angelo's son, 
Anthony Angelo Tremamondo (concerning whom see infra). 
We have already seen that Domenick Angelo and his wife were 
well known at the Court of Sardinia, and it is not impossible (as 
alleged) that a brother of Domenick held such an appointment. 
That brother, if any such appointment ever was made by 
' Letters Patent,' may have been Francis Xavier, unless indeed 
the Turin ' Angelo Tremamondo ' was really Anthony Angelo 
Tremamondo himself which is just as likely, seeing that it 
was probably Anthony who had gone forward with Domenick's 
consignment of sixty hunters to the King of Sardinia in 1765.^ 
In either case it is not a little strange that Henry Angelo, the 
family annalist, who loves to revel in royalties and lords and 
glories of all sorts, seems never to have heard of the ' Letters 
Patent * appointing a near kinsman of his own Master of the 
Horse to H.R.H. Maurice of Savoy at a salary of 1,500 
francs a year. These ' Letters Patent ' are too interesting 
not to be given in full from the translation in my posses- 
sion, and here they are : — 

Benedetto Maurizio di Savoia, Duke of Chablais, Prince of Bene, Dromero, 
Biu, Crescentino, Busea and Trino ; Marquis of Cantello, Santhia, Desana, 
Borgomanero, and Ghemare ; Count of Polenzo, Roccabruna, Ticer^, and Aper- 
tole ; all of which cities, lands, and places, appertain unto us ; as also Marquis 
of Aglie, Count of Bairo and Osegna. 

During all the period in which Angelo Tremamondo has held provisionally 
the office of our Master of the Horse, We having had opportunity of observing, 
no less his wisdom and punctuality in the fulfilment of his duties, than his 

See ante. 


ability, knowledge, and singular skill, as to the management and direction of 
horses, We are willingly disposed to sign our favour establishing him our Master 
of the Horse, being confident that he will fully realize our expectations. So by 
this certificate, signed by Our hand, sealed with our seal, and countersigned by 
our Secretary of the Cabinet, We elect, constitute, and depute the above men- 
tioned Angelo Tremamondo to be our Master of the Horse with all the honours, 
privileges, rights, prerogatives, and other things appertaining to this employ- 
ment, and with an annual stipend of one thousand five hundred francs, which 
we send to the Treasurer of our House and Household to pay him proportion- 
ately, at the terminations of the quarters, commencing from the date of the gift, 
and continuing during his services and our pleasure on condition that he gives 
the required oath to cease his former employment. We send in the meanwhile 
to all our officials, and to whosoever else be proper, to recognize him, esteem him, 
and make him generally known as our Master of the Horse, and to the Inten- 
dant General of our House and Household to inscribe him as such on the Balance 
of Accounts, making him of consequence, and letting him enjoy the stipend and 
other things above mentioned. This is our desire. Dated at Turin, 5th July, 

1776. H 

Patent of Master of the Horse to your Royal Highness in favour of Angelo 
Tremamondo, with all the honours, privileges, rights, prerogatives, and other 
things belonging to this employment, with an annual stipend of 1,500 francs, 
to commence from the date of the gift, on condition that he gives the required 
oath and ceases the employment he formerly held. 

on 22 September, 1723, was the fourth son of James Trema- 
mondo of Leghorn, and the third of the 'four brothers* 
referred to by Henry Angelo in his Reminiscences. If I am 
right in my present deductions he is the ' Angelo Trema- 
mondo ' so famous in his day as the Master of the Royal 
Academy of Exercises in Edinburgh — as well known and as 
widely respected in the northern capital as his brother Domenick 
was in the southern. 

He followed Domenick to England in or about 1753, and 
with Domenick he lived and worked up to the year 1763. 
His name never appears on the Rate Books as a separate house- 
holder, which is the evidence that he shared a domicile with 
Domenick. In St. James' Street, close to Domenick's house 
in St. James' Place, there was living at the same time a certain 
Peter Dubourgh whose name appears on the Rate Books, for 
instance in 1762 as 13J. lo^d, in arrear (Rate Books ^ St. James' 
Parish). John Xavier Tremamondo's wife was also named 
Dubourg — Marie Francoise Justine Dubourgh. She was pro- 
bably a relation of the Peter Dubourgh of St. James' Street, 
and John Xavier Tremamondo married her in or just before 
1759, the year in which Sir Joshua Reynolds painted her 


picture. As will be seen by the print from the original which 
is now in the possession of Mrs. Smith of Stoke Leigh, 
Weybridge, she was charmingly pretty. 

When Domenick Angelo moved from Leicester Fields to 
Soho in 1763, his brother John went to Edinburgh, furnished 
no doubt with strong support from the Royal Family. There 
he opened an academy for both riding and fencing, and there 
buildings and a manege were promptly built for him by the in- 
habitants at a cost of ^£2,733 155. His official salary was 
X200 a year, in addition to which he was allowed to charge 
three guineas a month as his tuition fee from every gentleman 
attending his academy. He realized his ambition when in 
1776 the academy received a royal charter. Officially he was 
known in Edinburgh as ' Mr. Angelo Tremamondo,* or 
familiarly as ^ Mr. Angelo,' a name which on Scottish lips 
soon assumed the form of Ainslie. His block of buildings 
and stables measured 150 ft. each way, and the actual riding 
school 124 ft. by 42 ft.^ The Weekly Magazine for 1776 de- 
scribes a ' carnival ' held at the Royal Riding School, at which 
the gentlemen performed their various equestrian exercises 
with great dexterity, and at which ' a gold medal with a suit- 
able device and motto, given by Mr. Angelo,' was presented 
by the Countess of Selkirk, as the prize of successful merit, 
to Robert Cay, Esq., of Northumberland. 

The edifice in which he so long officiated was pulled down 
to make way for the new Surgeons' Hall.^ 

That he was a fencing master as well as a riding master is 
proved by the Edinburgh Directory for 1775-6, in which he is 
entered thus : 'Angelo Tremamondo — Fencing Master, 
Nicholson Street.' ^ 

Kay gives an equestrian portrait of John Angelo in a 
KhevenhuUer hat and long riding boots. He died in Edinburgh 
leaving no issue by his second wife, his daughter who had 
married a surgeon named Miller having predeceased him. 

Death. — On March i6th, 1805, at Edinburgh, aged 84, Mr. Angelo Tre- 
mamondo, late Master of the Royal Academy of Riding there. {Edinburgh 
Magazine for 1805 ; also Scofs Magazine for 1805, p. 563) 

His widow appears to have left England altogether, and it 
is supposed that she died in Florence. 

1 Old and New Edinburgh, vol. ii. and Scots' Magazine for December, 1763. 

2 Ibid. 3 Copy in B.M. 


The following copy of a deed in Edinburgh constitutes 
John Xavier Tremamondo's last will and testament made 
twelve days before his death : — 

Register of Deeds, Edinburgh. 
Deed of settlement of Giovanni Xaverio Tremamondo, born 
Vol. 306, in the city of Leghorn in Tuscany, late Master of the Royal Aca- 
p. 999, demy of Exercises in Edinburgh, and Marie Francoise Justine 
25th April, Dubourgh, born in the city of Versailles in France, spouses, hereby 
1805. mutually give, etc., to each other and the survivor of them, the 
debts, money, arrears of life-rent, and other annuities and capital 
stock in the public funds of Great Britain, France, or those of any other King- 
dom or Republic or State, etc. And whereas in 1801 they executed a deed con- 
veying the same to Michael Francis Cosnard Du Park, born in the city of 
Constance, Department of La Manche, Republic of France, etc., and whereas 
since that period the said Michael has behaved very ill to them, they hereby 
revoke the said will, etc., and these presents alone are their last will, etc., and 
shall be effectual after their deaths. 

Dated at Edinburgh 4th March, 1805. 

(Signed) Gio^^ Xaverio Tremamondo, 

Marie Francoise Justine Tremamondo Dubourg. 

It does not appear who Michael Francis Cosnard Du Park 
was — some relation probably of Mrs. Angelo. Besides his 
daughter by Marie Dubourgh I take it that John Angelo of 
Edinburgh had also a son by a former alliance contracted in 
Italy, as to which see postea under Anthony Angelo Tremamondo. 

as we have seen at Leghorn on 6 September, 1725, being the 
fifth son of Giacomo Tremamondo, and the fourth of the 
' four brothers * mentioned by Henry Angelo in his Reminis- 
cences as having come within his knowledge. That he followed 
Domenick to England and became his brother's superinten- 
dent at the establishment in Carlisle Street is practically certain. 
For some reason in 1777 he sought to better his fortunes and 
applied therefore to the East India Company for a passage to 
Calcutta, as recorded in the following entract : — 

29 Jan. 1777. Petition of Mr. Leonardo Angelo to proceed to Bengal to 
teach the arts of Riding and Fencing. 

Ordered that the same be not granted (Directors' Court Minutes^ India 

He reappears in 1785 as a witness at his niece Caroline's 

1 It is to be supposed that his request was not granted on account of his age. 
Leonard was then over fifty. 

4> ON 
^ r«-> 

« <J 00 
H s. M 

B6 ^ 


bo • 
C ^ 
< C 

5 \i 

2 ^ 

i S 


D P 


> -a |3 

.2 oo 

U < J3- 

o o^oo 
o 1-1 
bo t^oo 

CU bo 

CJ t) 

O k4 Q ^' ^• 

.S o" 


■< ^ 

w P< Q 

So; '-' 
tXO Q . 




marriage to Captain St. Leger, signing himself ' Leonardo 
Tremamondo/ but he is not a witness to Catherine's marriage 
in 1790, and his subsequent history is as yet unknown. 

that the elder Angelo's usual signature was Domenico Angela 
Tremamondo^ and that his brother John of Edinburgh figured 
as Angela Tremamondo. We have now to take up the story of 
Antonio Angelo Tremamondo. 

When John Xavier Tremamondo and Leonard Maria 
Tremamondo followed their brother Domenick to England 
some time anterior to the year 1760 they probably brought in 
their train a young boy, Antonio Angelo Tremamondo, born 
abroad in the year 1747-8. This boy grew up of the house- 
hold of Domenick in Soho, and, having received a thorough 
training in scientific horsemanship, he lived to become oflficial 
Riding Master to the army of Bengal, and to introduce into 
India precisely those methods of riding, breaking and training 
cavalry horses which had won the approval of Lord Pem- 
broke, and which Domenick Angelo had also imparted to the 
representative riding masters from the various regiments who 
had come up to him for instruction. As this boy also lived 
to become the founder of that branch of the Angelo family 
which in every generation since has given of its sons to serve 
with distinction in our Indian army, he ranks in the pedigree 
next in importance after Domenick himself, and becomes an 
object of more than ordinary interest. Unfortunately the 
place of his birth I have not yet discovered, while even the 
name of his father has been a matter of some uncertainty. It 
is well known however that 'he was the son of one of the 
three brothers who settled in England, that he was born 
in Italy and that his mother's name was Pescara.' ^ This 
lady claimed kindred indeed with the princely house of 
Di Pescara, one of the oldest and noblest families of Italy, 
whose name often figures in the history of Europe, 
and one of whom, a Marquis of Pescara, commanded the 
armies of Charles V. and defeated Francis I. at the battle 
of Pavia.^ From such an illustrious stock on his mother's 
side was Anthony Angelo's mother said, whether rightly or 

1 Family Evidences penes Miss B. Angelo. 



wrongly, to be descended. And his father, * whom he well re- 
membered to have taken him from time to time when a boy 
to Holland House to see the Foxes with whom the Angelos 
were on terms of intimacy,'^ was doubtless John Angelo after- 
wards so famous as the Master of the Royal Academy of 
Exercises at Edinburgh already spoken of. Anthony Angelo 
is one of the very few members of his family mentioned by 
Henry Angelo in his veracious pages. Referring to ZofFany 
he says : — 

Though advanced in years he went to India where he met with my 
cousin, Captain Angelo, who was in the Body Guard, and who at that time 
was particularly patronized by Governor Hastings. My cousin and ZofFany 
were on the most intimate terms {Reminiscences). 

Years before that however, when in 1763 John Angelo went 
north with his new French wife to win the plaudits of the Scots 
by feats of horsemanship on his coal-black charger, almost as 
marvellous as those performed by Domenick on his famous 
white steed ' Monarch,' he seems to have left the young 
Anthony behind him in charge of his prosperous and more 
distinguished brother. 

At th.Qmanege of Domenick Angelo, Anthony must have been 
in the constant habit of meeting people good for him to know. 
Among these there were two who ultimately became warmly 
attached to him, and who remained his fast friends to the end. 
These were Warren Hastings and ZofFany the Royal Acade- 
mician. The former was at home for well-earned rest between 
1764 and 1769, the very time when Domenick*s star was most 
resplendent, and must have been a frequent visitor, in common 
with other notabilities, to Carlisle Street. ZofFany was a great 
friend of Domenick. ^ Often have I seen ZofFany at my 
father's table in Carlisle Street,' writes Henry in his Reminis- 
cences^ and^ it was ZofFany who with his own hands adorned 
the walls of Domenick's ' villa ' at Acton.^ All these three — 
Warren Hastings, ZofFany and Anthony Angelo — were destined 
to meet again, and play their parts in Bengal. Warren Hast- 
ings returned to Madras in 1769 and went on to Calcutta as 
first Governor-General of India in 1773. Anthony Angelo 
followed his friend in 1778, embarking some time in the late 
spring. He did not go without high recommendation, and 

1 Family Evidences penes Miss B. Angelo. 
2 Vol. ii. 107. 3 Ibid. 


the tradition in the family that the Prince of Wales himself 
(afterwards George IV.) smiled on his fortunes is probably- 
founded on fact, if His Royal Highness' youthful passion for 
Sophie Angelo was also a fact, or indeed in any case, since all 
the Angelos everlastingly basked in the sunshine of royal 
favour. There is at the India Office no evidence to show 
that Anthony sailed in any official capacity. On the contrary 
the evidence there would suggest that he went as a private in- 
dividual, because in the records of the old East India Com- 
pany it is stated that in December, 1781, Lieutenant A. 
Tremamondo had permission to send 100 moidores by the 
hands of the captain of the Swallow to Europe. One hundred 
moidores were the equivalent of ;£i30, which was about the 
cost of a passage to India in those days, and that sum so sent 
was perhaps a refund of his own passage-money to Domenick 
or to his father, John Angelo of Edinburgh. 

But if Anthony Angelo went out as a private individual, 
he did not arrive as a mere adventurer. There can be no 
doubt whatever about his credentials — that he was backed by 
unusually high interest. He at once became the protege not 
merely of Warren Hastings himself, but even of the Governor- 
General's enemies in the Council, who were only too ready to 
seize any opportunity to harass and thwart the great pro-consul, 
but who deigned to smile on Anthony Angelo. There is a 
Bengal Army List of the year 1778 still extant in the India 
Office, which shows that ^ Anthony Angelo Tremamondo ' had 
become cadet, ensign and lieutenant, apparently by cumulative 
act, by the month of December very soon after he had landed 
in the country. But what is more remarkable is that the 
Governor-General in Council created a special appointment of 
a lucrative character in Angelo's favour,^ besides granting him 
a large tract of land in the Chowringee suburb of Calcutta. 
Thus immediately on or soon after his arrival we find him first 
with an assured status as an officer of the Body Guard, and next 
in the receipt of a large official income in addition to his 
ordinary pay, which, with the substantial earnings of his manege^ 
enabled him to return to England in a few years with a hand- 
some fortune — one of Fortune's favourites who had shaken 
the pagoda-tree to some purpose. 

1 His income as Riding Master to the Army alone was 1,500 rupees a month, 
or over ^^2,000 a year. 



But it is time for the Voices of the Past to take up the 
story themselves. The following copies were taken by me 
first hand from the original records in Calcutta or at the India 
Office, and scarcely need comment/ 

I. From the India Office 

24th July, 1780 (Calcutta). Lieut. Tremamondo — Read a letter as follows 
from Lieutenant Tremamondo : — 

HoNBLE. Sirs, — ^The very great favour you have already shown me to confer 
on me a Grant of Land for the purpose of erecting a Riding School (on the plan 
of those in Europe) impresses me with the deepest gratitude. 

The extraordinary encouragement it has met with by the increase of scholars, 
and applications from all parts for training and breaking horses, at the same time 
that it evinces the real benefit and advantage of the undertaking, renders it in- 
dispensably necessary to solicit a further Grant of Land to the northward, not 
exceeding two beggahs. I have endeavoured to deserve the high mark of favour 
received by the unwearied zeal and diligence I have given to the plan, which I 
trust will hereafter become useful to the country by laying a foundation for the 
improvement of the Cavalry of Bengal. 

I have, etc., 

Angelo Tremamondo. 

May 30, 1780. 

Agreed that a space of 80 feet north of the north range of Mr. Angelo Tre- 
mamondo's Stables and running in a parallel line East and West of the East Ditch 
of the Road leading to the Court House, and ending at the Ditch opposite the 
house formerly occupied by the Commander-in-Chief be granted, etc., etc. 
{Bengal Public Consultations). 

loth October, 1780. Read the following letter from Mr. Angelo Trema- 
mondo : — 

HoNBLE. Sir and Sirs, — I beg leave humbly to submit the following out- 
line of a Proposal for the better Training of all the Cavalry on the Bengal 

1 will be ready to receive two Troopers out of each separate Troop of the 
three Regiments of Cavalry, and to instruct them correctly in the Art of Riding, 
agreeable to the Principles (recommended by Lord Pembroke) the most ap- 
proved in Europe, and universally adopted in every Regiment of Cavalry, as well 
Horse as Light Dragoons. I will undertake to qualify the said Troopers of the 
different Corps to train their Cavalry Horses exactly conformable to the above 
method of the Armies in Europe, enabling them on their return to join their 

^ Angelo's first application for land for his manege, with the deliberations 
of Council thereupon, no longer exist. All such documents at Calcutta anterior 
to the year 1780 or thereabouts were ordered to be destroyed by the late 
General Chesney (as I was informed) when he was in control at Calcutta. 

2 It can scarcely be a coincidence that the next year (178 1) Domenick in 
London made a similar proposal to Government for the instruction of the Horse 
Artillery at Woolwich, a proposal which was seconded by Lord Pembroke in a 
letter dated 16 July, 1781 {Reminiscences). 


respective Corps, to instruct the rest of the Troopers belonging thereto, to ride, 
break, and train their own horses in the same manner, and in short to make them 
perfect Masters of the Art of Riding. 

The Reward for effecting a Service that must require very great Labour and 
Perseverance I humbly submit to the Consideration of your Honble. Board. 
Should this Proposal meet with Approbation, and obtain me the Appointment of 
Riding Master to the Army, I shall make it my Constant Duty to execute it with 
unremitting Perseverance, Activity, and Zeal. 

I have the honour, etc., etc. 

(Signed) A. Angelo Tremamondo. 

2%th Sep. 1780. 

The Governor General (Warren Hastings). I recommend that Mr. 
Angelo's Proposal be referred to the Commander-in-Chief for his opinion, and 
cheerfully give my consent to the proposal of it, if it should obtain his Appro- 

Agreed, etc. (Ibid.) 

13 Oct. 1780. The Secretary informs the Board that in Conformity 
with this order of the loth inst. he referred the proposal made by Mr. Angelo 
Tremamondo to the Commander-in-Chief, who has no objection. 

Agreed to Mr. Angelo Tremamondo's Proposal that he be appointed Riding 
Master to the Army. 

Ordered that the amount of Salary to Mr, Angelo be deferred for future 
Consideration (Ibid.) 

[On 31 October, 1780, there is a letter from Lieutenant 
Tremamondo requesting that necessary orders might be 
issued to the different corps of cavalry to send down two 
troopers from each to the manege to receive instruction.] 

1st Feb. 1781. Lieutenant Angelo Tremamondo, having by the Boards' 
Resolution of 13th October been appointed Riding Master to the Army, 
and directed to train the Cavalry in this Establishment, the Salary to be allowed 
him on this account having been ordered to lie for further Consideration, it is 
now agreed that he be permitted to draw a Salary of 1,500 Sanaut Rupees per 
mensem, and ordered that the same be paid him accordingly by the Military 
Paymaster General (Ibid.) 

19th March, 1781. Read the following Letter from Lieutenant Angelo 
Tremamondo :— 

Honble. Sir and Sirs, — [He reports that the Troopers arrived on the 1st 
February for Instruction, and requests orders for their horses to be brought, or 
an equal number to be bought in Calcutta.] The usual allowance for cloathing, 
feeding, and quartering these Men and Horses will, I hope, be allowed me by the 
Honble. Board. 

I have the honour to be, etc., 

(Signed) A. A. Tremamondo. 

Calcutta, i^th March, 1781. 
Agreed that Lieutenant Angelo Tremamondo be authorized to purchase 
horses for the Troopers that have lately arrived to receive his Instructions, and 
that he be directed to report to the Board how many and the Prices. 




Ordered that the Commander-in-Chief be desired to inform the Board 
what he deems a proper and a fit allowance to Lieutenant Angelo for feeding 
and quartering the men and horses (Ibid.) 

2. Copied in Calcutta 

[On 19 March, 1781, the Commander-in-Chief (General 
Stibbert) sent a return of the strength of the * new raised troop 
of cavalry, and recommended that the men and horses required 
to complete the troop should be sent to Mr. Tremamondo for 

Minutes of Council, 19 March, 1781. A Troop of Cavalry having been lately- 
ruined by the voluntary Contributions of the European Inhabitants of the Pre- 
sidency for the service of the present [Mahratta] War,i Agreed that Captain 
James Salt be appointed to the command of it, and Ordered that it do join the 
Detachment in the Field under the command of Colonel Ironside. 

Ordered that the number of men and horses required to complete the troop 
be placed under the command of Lieutenant Angelo Tremamondo until such 
time as they are qualified to fill it. 

[On 22 March, 1781, there was a letter from Lieu- 
tenant Angelo Tremamondo informing the Board that the 
number of horses required for the service should be equal to 
the number of men, namely twenty-six.] 

Ibid. 2 April, 178 1. I European Sergeant, 2 Duffadars, and 23 private 
Moguls being instructed by Lieutenant Angelo Tremamondo, Ordered that the 
Military Paymaster be directed to pay him, etc., etc. 

Ordered that the horses purchased for the Troopers be mustered and en- 
rolled with those of the Governor General's Body Guard, and that they remain 
under the distinct charge of Lieutenant Tremamondo. 

Ibid, the same date, 2 April, 178 1. Ordered that they be returned on the 
strength of the Governor General's Body Guard and drawn for accordingly. 

Ordered that the Paymaster General do advance to Lieutenant Trema- 
mondo for providing stables for D° the sum of 13 rupees fer man, each horse, 
etc., etc. 

3. From the India Office 

4th December, 1781 (Calcutta). Lieutenant A. Tremamondo requests Per- 
mission to send 100 Moidores by Order to Europe. Granted. (Ibid.) 

20th February, 1784. Read a letter from Lieutenant Angelo Tremamondo 
as follows : — 

Honble. Sir and Sirs, — Encouraged by the Patronage, etc., I take the 
Liberty, etc. I arrived in Bengal in the latter end of the Year 1778, intending, 
if I should meet encouragement, to follow my Profession of a Riding Master. 
I was so fortunate as to find that the Institution of a Public Manage seemed to 
meet the Approbation as well of the Settlement in General as of your Honble. 

^ The names of the inhabitants who furnished the horses were ordered to be 
entered on the Records. 


Board. Many Gentlemen were eager to become my Pupils, and your Honble. 
Board was pleased to favour me with the Grant of a Piece of Ground for the 
express and sole Purpose of erecting on it a Manege. I lost no time in construct- 
ing the proper Buildings, and within the space of one Year had the Satisfaction 
to see them finished. I had soon several Pupils, and had besides the Happiness 
to receive from your Honble. Board the Appointment of Riding Master to the 
Army with the Salary of 1,500 Rupees per month. I can venture to assert that 
no Activity, Diligence, or Attention was wanting on my Part to deserve the liberal 
Encouragement with which I had been honored. A variety of other Causes, 
however, soon conspired to lessen the number of my Pupils. The Novelty of 
the Institution had ceased, the Exercise was found by some too violent for the 
Climate, many of the Gentlemen most disposed to persevere were obliged to leave 
Calcutta, others, in the Civil Service, were prevented from attending by the 
Duties of their Office, and the Junior Part of the Army to whom the Art of Riding 
was a most essential Part of Education, were in general unable to bear the Expense 
necessarily attending its Attainment. From these and other Causes my School 
declined. For many Months I had only one Pupil, and now I have only Three. 
The Honble. Board besides have found it necessary among their other Retrench- 
ments to annihilate the Appointment of Riding Master to the Army. The 
Man6ge,v^dth the Stable, Dwelling House, and other necessary Buildings, notwith- 
standing the strictest economy was observed in their Construction, cost 80,000 
Rupees, the whole of which I was under the Necessity of borrovvdng, and though 
for these many months past the profits of the Manege have been greatly unequal 
to the necessary expenses of it, I have considered myself as bound by my implied 
Engagements with the Public and the Board to keep up the former and usual 
Establishment of Servants and Horses. 

In this situation I look up for Relief to your Honble. Board, from whence 
alone I can hope to receive it, and earnestly request that you will be pleased to 
annul the Conditions annexed to the former Grant of the Ground, and give me 
new Pottahs (grants or leases) of it under the same rent, but with permission to 
build on it as many Dwelling Houses as I shall think proper. I do not expect 
this indulgence wdU by any means re-imburse the money which I have expended 
in the erection of the Manege, but I take the Liberty of soliciting it in preference 
to any other mode of relief, because it seems the least liable to objection. 

I have the honour to be, etc., 

(Signed) A. Angelo Tremamondo. 

Fort William, 

I2tb February^ 1784. 

The Governor General (Warren Hastings). Having, on Public Grounds, 
afforded Mr. Angelo every assistance that my Example and Countenance could 
produce, while he had a prospect of gaining a livelihood by his Profession, I now 
recommend his present Application to the Indulgence of the Board, that the 
Ground originally assigned for the purpose of a Manege be granted him absolutely 
and a new Pottah granted for the Same. 

Mr. Wheler. As the Ground on which Mr. Angelo's Riding House and 
Stables are erected have become his sole property subject to a particular re- 
striction mentioned in the Pottah or Grant, which Restriction if not taken off" 
would entail a public Nuisance to the Town of Calcutta in Perpetuity, I am very 
happy in the Opportunity of freeing the Inhabitants of that Part of the Town 



from the Inconvenience they are at present subjected to by his Stables- and 
Riding House, and therefore agree with the Governor General that such Pottah 
shall be granted, empowering Mr. Angelo to convert the Ground already granted 
to him to more useful purposes. 

Mr. Stables. I agree to comply with Mr. Tremamondo*s request, that the 
Town may be reHeved from the present Nuisance (Ibid.) 

Ibid. 23rd February, 1784. Lieutenant A. Tremamondo encloses a List of 
Horses belonging to his Detachment (i.e. of the Body Guard) at the Manage. 
He cannot tell what they sold for, having delivered them by Order to Lieutenant 
A. Murray, Quarter Master of Cavalry. 

List of Horses for the Governor General belonging to the Detachment of 
the Body Guard at the Manege : — 

Received from the Honble. Company, Horses — 26. 

Dead, January 23rd, 1782, a Bay Horse I 

„ February 4th, „ a Grey „ i 

» » 15th, „ a Bay „ I 

„ March i6th, „ a Bay „ I 

» ,y 29th, „ a Dun „ I 

„ April 1 6th, „ a Sorell „ I 


Delivered to Lieut. Murray, Quarter Master of Cavalry ... 20 

Total of Horses received from the Honble. Company .... 26 

(Signed) Angelo Tremamondo, 

Lieutenant. (Ibid.) 

2 1st February, 1785. Read Letter from the Commander-in-Chief : — 
Gentlemen, — At the Request of Lieutenant Anthony Angelo Tremamondo 
I do myself the honour to lay before you the accompanying Letter soliciting Per- 
mission to resign the Service and proceed to Europe on the Corntvallis for the 
purpose of settling his private Affairs, etc. 

In the Station Lieutenant Tremamondo filled as a Lieutenant in the Gover- 
nor's Troop and Riding Master to the Army, his Conduct, I must observe, has 
been satisfactory and creditable. 

I have, etc., 

(Signed) G. Stibbert. 

Fort William, 

lyth February y 1785. (Ibid.) 

In his own letter Lieutenant Tremamondo expresses his 
intention to return when his affairs have been adjusted, and 
wishes his intention to be expressed to the Honourable Court 
of Directors in such terms as may facilitate his restoration to 
the Service. 

He expresses a lively sense of gratitude and best wishes for 
the Board's success in affairs. 


He signs himself in full : — 

'Anthony Angelo Tremamondo, 


4. Copied in Calcutta 
Minutes of Council, 21 February, 1785. Agreed that Lieutenant Anthony 
Angelo Tremamondo be permitted to resign the Service and proceed to Europe 
for the purpose of settling his Private Affairs. 

So closed Anthony Angelo's connection with the Governor- 
General's Body Guard and the army of Bengal. He left his 
mark, and his mark remains on the cavalry forces of our 
Indian empire to this day. 

And here it may not be amiss to mention that the Body 
Guard in which Anthony Angelo held a commission was 
originally raised in 1773, when Warren Hastings first took 
up the reins as Governor-General of British India. Its first 
commanding officer was Captain Toone, who resigned com- 
mand of the troop on 27 January, 1777, and who was 
succeeded by Captain Horton Briscoe.^ Retiring to Eng- 
land in broken health Toone settled at Bath, from which 
place he kept up an interesting correspondence with Warren 
Hastings.^ As a troop the Body Guard has been on active 
service in the course of its history only once, and that was 
in the Rohilla campaign in the time of Warren Hastings.^ 

I believe it was Anthony Angelo's rosy descriptions of 
oriental possibilities that induced his old friend Zoffany, the 
once famous painter, to follow him to Bengal in 1781, where, 
at Calcutta and subsequently at the Court of Oude, he amassed 
a large fortune, returning to England in 1786. In Calcutta 
traces of Zoffany are still to be found, notably in the large 
altar-piece which he painted for ' The Old Church ' — the 
church of St. John — and which is now preserved against the 
wall in the west gallery. It is a glowing Rubens-like picture 
of the Last Supper, an enormous canvas, exhibiting in the 
faces of Christ and the Apostles portraits of the principal Eng- 
lish merchants, or others, resident in Calcutta at the time. 
An amusing story is told of one of them, namely that there 
was then in Calcutta a certain European, an auctioneer, en- 
dowed with the face of a malefactor, who sat for the Judas 

1 Calcutta Records. 

^ Letters in original in B.M. 

^ India Office Records. 



in the fond belief that he was personating St. John, the Be- 
loved Disciple. When the picture was set up, his amaze- 
ment at the trick played upon him was equalled only by his 
indignation, for a more sinister expression of face no one 
could imagine. Hence his soubriquet, * Judas Iscariot,' a 
nickname which was revived for the benefit of a certain gallant 
officer on the north-west frontier of India more than a genera- 
tion ago. 

Warren Hastings quitted India for ever in February, 1785. 
The Cornwallis sailed in March, but Anthony Angelo's private 
affairs in Calcutta must have detained him till June or later. 
In the Calcutta Gazette of 6, 13, 20 and 27 May, 1785, copies 
of which are in the British Museum, I find a notice headed — 

Private Sale — All the ground and buildings of the Riding School, Cal- 
cutta, etc.- — Apply to Mr. Angelo Tremamondo. 

I do not know where Anthony spent the two years inter- 
vening between his return and the date of his marriage, but 1 
suspect he was part of the time at any rate with his friends in 
Edinburgh. Some time after his arrival in London however 
he established himself in a house, then numbered 22, now 43 
or 45, in Howland Street, Fitzroy Square, in the parish of St. 
Pancras, within a very short distance of Domenico's house in 
Carlisle Street, and there he married and lived in good style. 
His wife was a charming young lady, a minor, less than half 
his own age. They were married so quietly that not one of 
his relations was present at the wedding, the only witnesses 
being the old rector of St. Pancras and the pew-opener. The 
following is from a certified copy from the register : — 

(Old St. Pancras). — Antonius, or Anthony, Angelo Tremamondo a 
Bachelor of this Parish, and Elizabetha Martha Bland, also of this Parish,^ a 
Minor, with the consent of Jane Bland, the lawful Mother of the said Minor, 
were married in this Church by Licence (B.L.) this twenty seventh Day of July 
in the Year One Thousand Seven Hundred and Eighty Seven by me, 

E. Whitaker, Curate. 

This marriage was solemnized between us : — 

Anthony Angelo Tremamondo, 
Elizabetha Martha Bland. 

In the Presence of — 

Benj. Mence, 
Mary Morgan. 

1 Mrs. Bland must have lived in apartments, as her name is not in the list of 
householders in the Rate Books. 


But though married so quietly, Elizabetha Martha Bland 
came of a very interesting and romantic stock. Her father 
was Edward Bland/ and if so (as I have been informed) 
the following entry from the registers of St. Martin's-in-the- 
Fields will refer to her : — 

Baptisms. 1767, Sept. 27. Martha Bland, (d.) of Edward and Jane (Bland). 
(Born) Sept. 12. 

If, as alleged, this is the baptismal register of Anthony 
Angelo Tremamondo's wife, it will be noticed that by the day 
of her marriage she had acquired the added name of Eliza- 
betha. To be sure it would have been quite in the delightful 
old Angelo manner to glorify the homely ' Martha * with the 
stately 'Elizabetha,* but I am not convinced that the two 
entries refer to the same individual.^ Whether or not, she was 
at least a grand-daughter of John Bland, who was the son 
of Nathaniel Bland, Doctor of Laws, and Judge of the 
Prerogative Court of Dublin.^ The story of his service 
in Bland's Dragoons (now the 3rd King's Hussars), how he 
fought at Dettingen, how he was made a prisoner by the 
French at Fontenoy, and took part in repressing the Jacobite 
rebellion of 1745, how he met West Digges the player and 
went on the stage, how his offended friends came and hissed 
him off, how he became joint lessee of the Edinburgh Theatre 
with Digges in 1772—3, how he retired in 1778, having been 
for twenty-three years a prime favourite in Edinburgh, how he 
wrote a novel, Frederick the Forsaken^ and how lastly he died in 
poverty, belong to the history of the British stage which he 
adorned so well. He had two brothers, the Reverend James 
Bland of Derryquin Castle, co. Waterford, and Francis Bland of 
Killarney, who married the actress, ' Mrs. Francis,' who was a 
Miss Grace Phillips, daughter of the Reverend Dr. Phillips of 
Waterford. These two had issue a Mr. George Bland who 
was with Kemble, and that consummate artist, second only to 
Siddons, Dorothea Bland, ' Miss Francis,' best known by her 
later stage-name of ' Mrs. Jordan,' the mother of the children 
of His Majesty William IV., and a great-grandmother of 
the present Duke of Argyll, husband of the Princess Louise. 

1 An Edward Bland lived in Spur Street, Solio, his house rated at ^48 a year 
(true rent, 52) {^Rate Books). 

2 They do, and Anthony's will^ to be presently quoted^ shows that his 
wife's name was Martha only. 

3 From a printed pedigree of the Angelo family. 



George Bland of Kemble's Company more than once acted 
Sebastian to his sister's Viola at Drury Lane/ He married 
Miss Romanzini, also of Drury Lane, in 1790/ who in 1792 
crowned him with twin children.^ I cannot tell if (Elizabetha) 
Martha Bland ever graced the stage herself. Pretty, charming 
and accomplished as she was, she might well have done so 
with so much talent and interest to recommend her, and it 
is not unlikely, as I find that in April, 1787, some months 
before Anthony Angelo's marriage, a ' Miss Francis ' was 
acting at the Haymarket.* Be that as it may, the short pedi- 
gree following will show her connection with her celebrated 
cousin, ' Mrs. Jordan,' and through her with Mrs. Jordan's 
royal offspring. 

Pedigree 4 

The Very Reverend James Bland, Dean of Ardfert 

Nathaniel Bland, LL.D., Judge, Prerogative Court, Dublin 

Capt. John Bland of 
Bland's Dragoons 
and the Theatre 
Royal, Edinburgh 

Edward Bland = Jane 

Rev. Jas. Bland 
of Derryquin 

Francis Bland of Killarney = Grace Phillips 
(by a 2nd vsrife) {N. & Q. I Mrs. Francis') 
ser. 9, xii. 277) I 

George Bland of 

Drury Lane 

= Miss Romanzini, 


(Elizabetha) Martha=Anthony Angelo 
Bland, mar. Tremamondo, 
27 July, 1787 b. 1747, d. 1829 

Dorothea Bland, first 
* Miss Francis,' and 
subsequently ' Mrs. 
Jordan ' 

George, first Earl of 
Munster, eldest son 
of William IV. 

The following names may also refer to members of the 
family of Elizabetha Martha Bland, though the records are too 
meagre to furnish a theory of themselves : — 

1 For all these details about the Blands consult A History of the Bland Family , 
by Carlisle (copy in the Library of the Society of Antiquaries) ; D.N.B. ; 
N. and Q., ser. 9, xii. 207 ; Dibdin's Annals of the Edinburgh Stage, pp. 139, 170, 
173-5 ; Genealogical MagazineyNo. 12, April, 1898, p. 692 ; Angelo War Ser- 
vices (1903). 

2 G.M. p. 956. 

^ Ibid. 1792. 

^ Genest's History of the Stage, vi. 453. 


Burials (Old St. Pancras') 

Sept. 28, 1772, Frances Bland. 
Oct. 26, 1774, John Bland (child). 
May 10, 1777, John Bland (child). 
Aug. 2, 1778, Charles Bland. 
Oct. I, 1780, John Bland. 
Nov. 7, 1782, Ann Bland. 

In Howland Street, Fitzroy Square, St. Pancras, Anthony 
Angelo Tremamondo lived close to the open fields, where now 
are to be seen only bricks and mortar, up to the year 1806, 
and there most of his children were born. The St. Pancras' 
Rate Books afford us glimpses of him year by year and quarter 
by quarter. I make two extracts as follows : — 

St. Pancras 

Year 1797. Howland Street, South Side, Poor Rate (is. in the £). 
22 I 56 I Anty Angelo j 11 I £1 Ss. od. 

I ^ I For Paving Rate 60. I 1 

That is, the number of his house is 22, he pays two 
quarters ('II namely 28j., which is at the rate of 56^. for 
the year on his rateable value £^6 at is, in the £1, But 
for paving rate his rateable value is £60. Rates are never 
paid on the full rent. If we suppose he was allowed off one 
eighth for the poor rate and one sixteenth for the paving rate 
(which was the case), his true rent must have been £6^ a year, 
which represents at that time a good house and a good 

Here is another extract showing that he was still living in 
St. Pancras in 1804 — in fact he remained there until after his 
daughter Matilda's birth in 1805, when he moved to Maryle- 
bone : — 

St. Pancras 

1804. Howland Street, South Side : — 
22 I 60 I Ant^ Angelo I 11 I £1 10s. od. 

Reduced on application (being Poor Rate) to ^56 

Anthony Angelo's portrait when he was about forty, 
painted at the time of his marriage by his old friend ZofFany, 
shows that he had then become stout, but it exhibits the real 
Angelo face with features strikingly like those of both the 
brothers Domenick and John Angelo. That of his wife, on 
the other hand, done at the same time by the same artist, is a 
very youthful presentment of a slender girl, a face delicate and 



refined, rather of the aquiline type, with beautiful eyes, carrying 
that air of distinction for which her sons when serving in 
India were so remarkable, and which has descended to some 
of her representatives of the present generation. The match 
between these two was in every way happy, as happy as that 
of Domenick and Elizabeth Johnson, as cloudless as that of 
Garrick and his Viennese wife, Mrs. Domenick Angelo's 
' dearest friend * — the whilom opera-dancer of Drury Lane, the 
beautiful Eva Maria Violetti : — 

Her body all grace and all sweetness her mind, 

as in eulogistic verse one of her admirers described her in 
1750. To Anthony, after his labours in hot steamy Calcutta, 
the sweetness of the home to which he had retired on an in- 
come ample for every reasonable need must have been 
grateful indeed, and with one of old he might have ex- 
claimed : — 

Inveni portum — Spes et Fortuna, valete ! 

Such a life, however, in its otiose retirement, is all too calm 
and still to afford much matter for biography. And yet the 
baptismal records of his children at St. Patrick's Church, 
Soho Square afford us unexpected glimpses of his serene 
home, and of the character and position of some at least of the 
numerous friends who used to visit him and to enjoy his 
hospitality in Rowland Street. Among them we find mention 
made of Warren Hastings and his wife Martha, of Gavin 
Hamilton, Zoffany, General Benoit de Boigne, and especially 
of congenial friends of the operatic or dramatic stage. 

Let us look at those registers. At that period Father 
Gaffy was the priest at the church of St. Patrick, which was 
founded in 1791 or 1792 on the site of the once notorious 
Mrs. Cornely*s Carlisle house. It stood exactly opposite the 
other Carlisle house, just across the square, in which Domenick 
and his gentle wife lived and reigned with so much distinction 
and so much social success for forty years (i 763-1 802). When 
Anthony Angelo in 1806 moved his residence from St. Pan- 
eras to Marylebone, from Howland Street to Newman Street, 
Father GaflFy must have transcribed the baptismal records of 
twelve of Anthony's children, from loose memoranda very pro- 
bably, into the church register, and in the very beginning of 


the book he made a note in his own handwriting to serve as an 
index-note thus : — 

Duodecim proles Dom. Angelo invenientur pag. 349-350. 

As proles usually means descendants^ and as Dom, looks 
suspiciously like an abbreviation of Dominiciy this entry at 
first was rather disconcerting. It looked so much as though 
Father Gaffy had meant to say — ' Twelve descendants of (the 
famous) Domenick Angelo (then dead three or four years) 
will be found on pages 349-350/ I doubt not now however 
that the good priest's sentence was intended to read, ' Duode- 
cim proles Domini Angelo/ etc., that is to say, ' Twelve children 
of Mr. Angelo will be found on pages 349-350.' And though 
Dominus in ecclesiastical Latin is the honorific for a priest 
rather than for a layman, that of course is the only meaning 
that fits in with the ascertained facts of the case. 

Those baptismal registers are far too interesting not to be 
quoted in full, and it will be most convenient to give them 
here, in the original Latin, as they stand in the register book, 
first of all however tendering to the good Fathers of St. 
Patrick's my best thanks for their courtesy. 

St. Patrick's Church, Soho Square 

1. 21 Nov. 1788. bapt^ Maria f. Antonii Angelo Tremamondo et Eliza- 
bethas Marthas Bland, Conjugum, Nata die 18 ejusdem mer. Patricii (Sponsors) 
Georg. Liviez,! Maria Liviez,^ Francesca Corri.3 

2. 18 Dec. 1789. Bapt^ Ludovisa [Louisa] f. Antonii Angelo Tremamondo 
et Eliz Martha Bland, C. Nata 13 ejusdem m. Pat", Gavin Hamilton * et Fran- 
cesca Corri. 3 

1 Some of the more obvious words I abbreviate. 

2 This was probably the famous dancer and ballet-master of Drury Lane and 
his English wife, with whom Henry Angelo stayed in Paris, and who must have 
returned to England to escape the horrors of the Revolution. 

3 Francesca Corri was a celebrated mezzo-soprano singer of opera, etc. She 
was a daughter of Natale Corri, the brother of Domenico Corri (i 746-1 825), the 
great musical composer, and partner for two years of Dussek, who married his 
daughter Sophia. They were Italians from Rome, who lived thirteen years in 
Edinburgh (1774-87), after which, in the very year of Anthony's marriage, 
they came and settled in London. In Edinburgh they must have been on 
friendly terms with both the Angelos and the Blands. Domenico's most famous 
work was The Traveller, or Music's Fascination (D.N.B.) 

* Gavin Hamilton was the famous painter and excavator (died 1797) who 
lived and worked for the most part in Italy. One of his sitters was the beautiful 
Countess of Coventry — Miss Maria Gunning {D.N.B. , and N. and Q. 10 Oct. 


3. 15 Feb. 1791. Bapt^ Rosalia f. Antonii Angelo Tremamondo et Eliz 
Marthae Bland C. Nata 11 ejusdem m. Pat" Joh. Zoffany,i Rosalia Maggi,2 et 
Maria Taylor.s 

4. 3 Oct. 1792, bapt. Joannes Gulielmus Thomas Angelus f. Anton" Angelo 
Tremamondo et Elizabethae Marthas Bland, C. Natus 29 Sept. preced'^ Pat" 
Joannes Gul. Rose, Eques,* Dominicus Candidus Boyer s et Rosalia Maggi.2 

5. 31 May 1795 Bapt. Antonius Edwardus Angelus f. Antonii (etc.) et Eliza- 
bethae (etc.) conj. Natus 30 ejusdem m. Pat" Edwardus Maxwel Brown,^ et 
Isabella Greive.^ 

6. 10 Aug. 1797 Bapt. Warren Hastings Bennet f. Antonii (etc.) et Elizabethae 

1 John Zoffany, the Royal Academician. Died 18 10. Zoffany and Gains- 
borough both rest in the historic churchyard of Kew. 

2 Rosalia Maggi. Francesca Corri had a sister named Rosalia, also a public 
singer, though not so famous. This is probably she under her married name. 
Possibly these Maggis were connected with the family of Carlo Maggi, a famous 
Milanese sonneteer of the seventeenth century, some of whose sonnets were 
translated into EngHsh (D.N.B.). 

3 Mary Taylor — ^perhaps Mary the wife of Thomas Taylor the Platonist, 
who was a familiar figure in Soho. Their son, Thomas Proclus Taylor, wrote 
for the stage (N. and Q. ser. 7, ix. 194). Or she may be identified with Mrs. 
Taylor, a well-known actress of the time at Drury Lane (Genest's History of 
the Stage). 

* John William Rose. A Domenick Rose was living in Poland Street, Soho, 
in 1758 (Rate Books). Dr. William Rose, famous for Yns Translations of Sallusty 
kept a flourishing school at Chiswick, which Henry Angelo attended before going 
to Eton. I do not know if these three Roses were slips of the same Rose, or 
of different Roses. 

5 Domenick White Boyer. There were several Boyers in the service of the 
E. I. Company. Thus, Cornelius Boyer, C.B., went out as a cadet in 1799. 

6 Edward Maxwel Brown. This is another witness whom I have not had the 
time to identify. 

7 Isabella Greive of Soho Square was the wife of Davidson Richard Greive, 
once of CO. Northumberland. She died 15 November, 1827, aged 78 (tablet 
in church). Her husband was the notorious revolutionist, and persecutor of 
Madame Dubarry. He was a son of Richard Greive (or Grieve), an attorney of 
Alnwick in co. Northumberland, and Elizabeth Davidson. The writer in the 
D.N.B. infers that he never was married. Evidently he was, and either he had 
abandoned his wife or she had renounced him. He died at Brussels 22 February, 
1809 (D.N.B.). 


(etc.) conj. Natus 15 Aprilis prec. Pat" Warren Hastings, Eques,i et Bennet 
de Boyne, Generalis,2 Martha Hastings, 3 et Matilda Angelo [sister]. * 

7. 17 Aug. 1798 Bapt, Cecilia Cromy f. Antonii (etc.) et Elizabethae (etc.) 
conj. Natus 13 July prec. Pat" Michael Cromy s et Maria Angelo [sister]. 

8. 12 Ap. 1800. Bapt. Frederirus Josephus Joannes f. Antonii (etc.) et 
Elizabethae (etc.) conj. Natus 26 Jan. prec. Susceptrix erat Anna Bennet. ^ 

9. 13 July 1801, Bapt. Georgius Ricardus f. Antonii (etc.) et Elizabethae 
(etc.) conj. Natus 20 Ap. prec. Pat" Georgius de Liviez,^ Joannes Angelo [bro- 
ther], Maria de Liviez et Ludovisa Angelo [sister]. 

10. 16 Aug. 1802. Bapt. Ricardus Fredericus f. Antonii (etc.) et Eliza- 
bethae (etc.) conj. Natus 6 ejusdem m. Pat" Fredericus Andree,^ et Maria An- 
gelo [sister]. 

11. 29 Jan. 1804, Bapt. Christina Caroletta Adalaida f. Antonii (etc.) et 
Elizabethae (etc.) Nata 18 ejusd. m. (no godfathers entered). 

12. 5 May 1805, Bapt. Matilda f. Antonii (etc.) et Elizabethae (etc.) Nata 
30 Ap. 1805 Ceremonie suppl. die 15 Jan. 1806. Pat" Antonius Angelo [brother] 
€t Maria Angelo [sister], 

13. 21 Sept. 1806, Bapt. Gulielmus Josephus Angelus f. Antonii (etc.) et 
Elizabethe (etc.) conj. Natus 18 ejusdem m. Patji Josephus de la Nave,^ et 
Ludovisa Angelo [sister]. 

1 The great Governor-General of India (1732-1818). 

2 General Bennet Boyne. This is the famous General, Benoit La Borgue, 
Count de Boigne, born at Chamberg in Savoy on 8 March 1751. After 
serving in the French and Russian armies, he went to India, furnished with 
letters from Lord Percy to Warren Hastings. For a time he was in the 
Bodyguard of Lord Macartney at Madras (1778). Thence he went to 
Calcutta in 1782, where he must have known Anthony Angelo. In 1783 
he went to Lucknow, and in 1784 entered Scindia's service, retiring to 
London in 1797 with a fortune of 400,000. There he married a young 
girl, Eleonora Ad^le D'Osmond, daughter of the Marquis D'Osmond. They 
separated in 1804, and he retired to Savoy, where he died on 21 June, 1830. 
(ComptoTt's Military Adventurers, pp. 15-100) 

3 Martha, wife of Warren Hastings. Formerly the Baroness Imlioff. 
* See record of her burial infra. 

5 Michael Cromy. There was a well-to-do family of this name living in 
Soho. Thus a Robert Cromey had a house in Compton Street in lygS (Rate 

« Anna Bennet. When General Benoit de Boigne left India he brought 
with him two children of his own by a Persian lady, the daughter of a 
Persian Colonel. Their native names were Ali Bux and Bunoo, changed at 
baptism to Charles Alexander and Anna respectively. The former married 
the daughter of a French nobleman. Bunoo (Banu, a lady of rank, the 
favourite name of the Queen of the Fairies in Eastern romance, as Peri-banu\ 
under the name Anna Bennet, is the lady here mentioned. She died in 
Paris in 1810. See Military Adventurers, p. 100 (1892). 
See note 2 on p. 55. 

8 Frederick Andree. I have not identified this witness. 

9 Joseph de la Nave (Dellanave). This is also a witness I have not been able 
to find. 


14. II Sept. 1 81 1, Georgiana Ludovisa Francesca f. Antonii (etc.) et Eliza- 
bethae (etc.) Nata 3 May 181 1 Pat" Georgius Templer,* Georgiana Riley 2 et 
Maria Angelo Tremamondo [sister]. 

To these must be added the following two children from 
Rowland Street, whose baptismal registers are wanting : — 

Burials (St. Ann's, Soho) 

15. 5 Feb. 1794. Isabella Henrietta Angelo, a child of six weeks from St. 
Pancras. Died of convulsions and buried in the South Vault. 

16. 28 Sept. 1797. Matilda Angelo, aged 10 years, from Rowland St., 
Fitzroy Square. Died of decline, and buried in the South Vault.3 

And yet again to these we may possibly add yet another 
son, namely, — 

17. John Angelo, who reveals himself in the second of the 
following two burial registers : — 

St. Ann's, Soho : Burials 

(1) Angelo, William Joseph, a child from Marylebone. March 19th, 1807. 

(2) Angelo John, a child from Marylebone, March 23rd, 1807.* 

William Joseph is No. 13, above recorded, of Anthony 
Angelo's children, and John was probably his twin brother. 
Doubtless he was the more delicate child of the two, and, pri- 
vately baptized, did not live for the supplementary public 
service in the Roman Catholic church. Both these children 
will have been interred in the south vault under St. Ann's. 

Thus have we accounted for seventeen of the twenty-two 
children whom (Elizabetha) Martha Bland is said to have borne 
to her husband Anthony Angelo. The rest of them must, 
I think, have been privately baptized, and, unrecorded, must 
have died in first infancy. 

With regard to Matilda, No. 1 6, she, poor little maid, 
only a month before her death, had stood sponsor to her little 
brother. Warren Hastings. 

1 George Templer had been a friend of Anthony Angelo in Calcutta, where 
he held the position of Transport Officer to the army of Bengal {India Office 

» Georgina Riley. There were two Rileys or Ryleys with whom this lady 
may have been connected, Charles Riley the painter (1732-98) and Samuel 
William Ryley the actor, and author of the Itinerant, or Memoirs of an Actor 
(1759-1837) iP.N.B.) 

3 The south vault was reserved for those whose friends could afford to pay 
higher fees. 

* Unless this John Angelo was a son of George Frederick Angelo, who 
lived in Great Portland Street (Memoranda Papers, Record Office) 


From the year 1 806 Anthony Angelo and his family lived 
at 74, Newman Street, Oxford Street, in the parish of Mary- 
lebone, and there full of years he died in 1829. 

Died in Newman St. 2 October, 1829, aged 82, Anthony Angelo, Esqre. 
{GM. No. 99, p. 379). 

His will at Somerset House bears date 21 January, 1828, 
and it was proved 10 October, 1829. In it he names his wife 

* Martha Angelo Tremamondo,' to whom he leaves his house 
and all his effects, etc., etc., so long as she remains unmarried. 
He speaks of an ' annuity of ;^88o from Lord Blessington, and 
of another annuity of £26^ from Sir William Polt/ He 
mentions two of his ^ sons. Captain John Angelo Tremamondo, 
and Anthony Angelo Tremamondo,' and five daughters, namely, 

* Maria, Rosalinda, Matilda, Ann, and Georgiana,' on whom he 
settles ^ ;^3,ooo ' each. He appoints his * wife, Martha Angelo 
Tremamondo, Mary Angelo Tremamondo, spinster, and Rosa- 
linda Helena Angelo Castell (wife of Jehosaphat Castell),' his 

His friend ZofFany had predeceased him, and to mark his 
admiration of his character had appointed him one of his 
executors by his will which was made 22 April, 1805, and 
proved 24 January, 181 1, the two executors named being 

* Anthony Angelo Tremamondo of Howland St. in the Parish 
of St. Pancras, and Charles Dumerque of Piccadilly.* ^ An- 
thony's character like that of Domenico Angelo appears to 
have been that of a high-minded gentleman, and his friend- 
ship with Warren Hastings is confirmation strong that he was 
in all respects most admirable. 

His sons were all educated at St. Edmund's College, 
Herts, and two of them were mixed up with a great out- 
break there in 1 809. As soon as it was over, * Mr. Angelo,' 
considering that the matter had not been fairly dealt with by 
the college authorities, convened a meeting of the parents at 
his own house, but the dispute was settled amicably, the 
president, Dr. Poynter, standing firm. One of Anthony 
Angelo's autograph letters addressed to the parents still exists 
at the school.^ 

The whole of his sons had distinguished careers, and those 

1 Somerset House Wills. 

2 College Evidences. 



of his daughters who married, married well. Lack of space 
precludes me from more than a brief account of his sons : — 

I. John Angelo, formerlyJoHN William Thomas Angelo 
Tremamondo, was admitted to the service of the East 
India Company on 28 October, 1808, joining the 3rd 
Light Cavalry of Bengal. It was characteristic of the 
time that though in the service of the E. I. Company 
he held also for a time a commission in a British 
regiment. He is the John Angelo for whom his 
father Anthony bought a cornetcy in the 22nd Light 
Dragoons, to which he was gazetted on i May, 18 10, 
and a lieutenancy in the 24th Light Dragoons, to 
which he was gazetted on 14 November, 18 11. He 
was strongly backed by General William St. Leger, 
who testified to his high character. After four years 
in the Company's service, he finally elected for India, 
and his commission in the British cavalry was sold by 
his father on 16 September, 1813.^ On his return to 
India from furlough in September 171 7, he obtained 
permission to drop the name of Tremamondo and to 
be designated in future John Angelo^ After a brilliant 
career of forty-five years, during which he served in 
every campaign, played a conspicuous part in nearly 
every action in India, the Punjab and Afghanistan, 
under the most distinguished captains of the age, he 
retired in (it is said) 1853.^ 

He married Eleanor, stated to have been a daugh- 
ter of Major Neate, 57th Regiment, who was killed 
at Corunna with Sir John Moore. Among his chil- 
dren were two sons : — 

(i) John Anthony Angelo^ born in India 27 Octo- 
ber, 1825.* Nominated by J. P. Muspratt, 
Esq., at the recommendation of E. B. Fox, 
Esq., he joined the Bengal (now Royal) 
Artillery on 2 February, 1842, playing a 
noble part in the Sutlej and Punjab cam- 

1 Memo. Papers at the Record Office. 

2 Only three of Anthony's sons were christened * Angelo.' The rest had to 
assume that name when it was decided by the family to discard the surname 
tremamondo and to use Angelo instead {Army Records^ India Office) 

3 See his record in War Services of the Officers of the Army^ ^Official Army 
List, July, 1895. •* Army Records. 


paigns and the Mutiny, and retiring to 
Mussoorie for well earned rest i June, 

He married a daughter of Captain W. 
Brookes, 75th Regiment, and had issue 
four sons, of whom Colonel J. W. E. 
Angelo commanded the 12th Bengal Infan- 
try ; Lieutenant George Sephote Angelo, of 
the 23rd Madras Light Infantry, perished 
at Mandalay in the Burmah campaign of 
1887 ; Harry Abercrombie Angelo, of the 
Burmah Military Police, perished at Man- 
dalay in the Burmah campaign of 1886 ; 
and Raymond Digby, one of the handsomest 
men in the Indian army, adjutant of the 
I St Gurkha Rifles, was killed in action at 
Wano in Waziristan, 3 November, 1894, 
aged thirty. 

(2) Edward Fox Angelo of the 27th (North Glou- 
cestershire) Regiment, and from February, 
1864, of the Royal Scots. Served in the 
Crimea with distinction, and after a career 
on the staff in India retired to Australia in 

Anthony Edward Angelo, born as we have seen on 
30 May, 1795. From St. Edmund's, Herts, he went 
to Haileybury (where Henry Angelo was fencing 
master from 1806 to 18 16) in 18 13. He was ap- 
pointed Writer in the E. I. C. in 18 15 and was 
appointed to Madras. In that Presidency he had 
a prosperous career, becoming finally judge of Chit- 
toor in 1840. In 1843 resigned the Service 
(i January). He died on 28 July, 1853.^ 

Death. July 28, 1853. In Fitzroy Square, Anthony Edward 
Angelo, late Judge of Chittoor, Madras Presidency (G.M. vol. 40, 
P- 3H)- 

Warren Hastings Bennet (Angelo), the only son 
who elected for the home army. He received his 
first appointment when he was sixteen, on 18 July, 

1 See Bengal Jrmy Lists for full details of service. 

2 Civil Records, India Office. 



1 8 12, as cornet in the 25th Dragoons. On 23 
February, 1 8 1 5, when lieutenant he was transferred to 
the 8 th Hussars, and retired on half-pay on 14 May, 
1823. Of the next five years he spent two in Lon- 
don, one in France, and two in Hereford. He 
married 28 October, 1826, at St. Pancras* Church, 
London, and in 1828 had one daughter, Fanny 
Maria Angelo, born 20 April, 1827.^ He died 20 
June, 1832, aged only thirty-five, at Bayswater, Lon- 
don, being ' late of the 8 th Hussars, and third son 
of Anthony Angelo, Esq.' ^ He was interred at St. 
Ann's, Soho. 

Warren Hastings Angelo had issue one son and 
one daughter. His son Warren Hastings Alured 
Angelo, born in December, 1830, died aged fifteen 
months in February, 1832.^ 

His daughter Frances (so named after her mother) 
had quite a romantic destiny, and as the story reflects 
honour upon her, I quote it : — 

Fanny lived with her aunt, Mrs. C , but offended her by 

going to a fancy-dress ball as a Greek. After that she stayed 
with the Henry Angelos, where she got her outfit for India. On 
her voyage out the ship caught fire, she behaved very pluckily, 
and the Captain, Harrison, fell in love with her and married her 
{From a contemporary letter). 

Courage has always been a characteristic of the 
Angelos, of both the men and the women. 

Frederick Joseph John (Angelo) of the 7th Bengal 
Light Cavalry was born on 26 January, 1800, and is 
described as ' son of A. Angelo, Esqr., formerly of 
the Company's Cavalry, Bengal/ He entered the 
service of the E.I.C. 14 June, 1820. He became 
Deputy Judge-Advocate-General of the Dinapore and 
Benares Division, and was permitted to make Benares 
his general place of residence. He resigned his ap- 
pointment on the staff 23 December, 1840, became 
a major 26 July, 1841, and was transferred to the 
Invalid Department and was permitted to go to the 

^ Papers at the Record Office. 

2 G.M. No. 102, p. 646. 

3 St. Ann's Registers, Soho. 


hills north of ' Deyrah ' (Mussoorie) on 4 February, 

He married Catherine, a daughter of Colonel Van 
Cortlandt, an officer in the service of Runjeet Singh.^ 
He left among other sons : — 

(1) Frederick Courtlandt Angela, Born in India 

6 October, 1826. 'Frederick Cortlandt 
Angelo, son of Frederick Angelo, Esq., 
Lieut, in the 7 th Bengal Light Cavalry, and 
Catherine his wife, born at Karnaul on the 
6th October, 1826, and baptized at the same 
place, 20th November, same year, by me 
Edward White, Offg. Chaplain.'^ Arriving 
at Fort William 8 March, 1 845, he was posted 
to the 50th N.I. at Aligarh, was transferred 
to the 55th, and finally removed at his own 
request to the 1 6th N.I. 10 February, 1846. 
This officer was killed at Cawnpore in the 
Mutiny, June, 1857, and to complete the 
sad story his son (by Helena Elizabeth his 
wife), namely Frederick Canning Cortlandt 
Angelo of the 40th Foot, was also killed at 
Fort Battye, Afghanistan, in 1879-80, 
having been born at Calcutta, a posthumous 
child, on 21 September, 1857.* 

(2) 'John Angela^ born in India, 15 May, 1832, 

another most distinguished officer, one of 
the strongest men in India, famous for his 
powers of wrestling. Educated at Mussoo- 
rie, he volunteered for the Punjab cam- 
paign, and distinguishing himself at Chil- 
lian walla and throughout the whole Punjab 
campaign, especially at the action of Sadula- 
pore, when he was ' highly commended ' 
by General Sir J. Thackwell, on whose 
staff he was. As a consequence he received 
a commission by nomination of Sir A. 
Galloway, K.C.B., and recommendation of 

* Record ceases {Army Records ^ India Office). 

2 His son John's evidences. 

3 Old St. John's Registers, Calcutta. 

* Ibid. 



the Rt. Hon. the Marquis of Dalhousie, 
Governor-General/ He was first posted to 
the 68th N.I. in April, 1850, and stationed 
at Meerut, and on transfer to the 50th N.I. 
the same year, at Berhampore. He served 
through the Mutiny and was on the staff of 
Nicholson at the siege of Delhi. He was 
also in the Ambela campaign (1868), and 
became assistant Adjutant-General at Pes- 
hawur, and thence, after having been re- 
peatedly wounded, and mentioned in 
despatches, in his various campaigns, he 
retired to Simla as major on 7 January, 
1876, where he died in the year 1900, 
leaving issue who on tented field and in 
many a hard fought fight have worthily 
upheld the family reputation for valour. 

5# George Richard (Angelo) was born on 20 April, 1801. 
I have no record of the life of this son, but evidently 
he was the author of a book entitled Poems by George 
Angelo^ edited by Anthony Edward Angelo, 1827, 
which he did not live long enough to publish himself. 
He died at his father's house in Newman Street aged 
only twenty-five : — 

Death. — Died in Newman St. 6th Dec. 1826, G. F. (for ' R. ') 
Angelo, Esq. (G. M. No. 96).2 

6. Richard Frederick (Angelo) was born on 6 August, 
1 802. He was admitted to the service 2 1 November, 
1820, became ensign in the 23rd N.I. 3 June, 1820, 
lieutenant in the 34th N.I. 11 July, 1823, and captain 
in the same regiment 5 June, 1835. 

He was appointed aide-de-camp to the Governor- 
General 10 January, 1835. Subsequently he was 
placed at the disposal of the Governor of the North- 
West Provinces, and appointed assistant to the Agent 
and Commissioner of Delhi. Assuming charge of his 

1 Army Records, India Office. 

2 The baptismal registers of George Richard and Warren Hastings Angelo 
show that they were both delicate chldren, as contrary to rule neither was 
brought to pubHc baptism for several months after birth. 


office on 25 April, 1840, he became Commandant of 
the Palace Guards on 6 May, and on confirmation of 
this appointment on 19 September, 1841, ceased to 
be assistant to the Agent, but on 15 May, 1843, 
was again vested with powers as assistant to the Agent 
at Delhi in addition to his duties as Commandant of 
the Palace Guards/ 

Richard Frederick Angelo married Elizabeth, a 
daughter of Captain John Mansell of the 62nd Foot 
(the Wiltshire Regiment), subsequently a Knight of 
Windsor, who on the recommendation of Lord Liver- 
pool, Secretary of State for War and the Colonies 
(1809-12), was appointed ensign in the 62nd when 
seventeen years of age on 16 February, 18 14. The 
family of Mansell, of which this officer was a mem- 
ber, has a very clear descent, as is well known, through 
that Jenkin Mansell who married Cecily, a grand- 
daughter of King Edward IV., from the famous John 
Mansell of the ' Council of Twelve ' in the reign of 
Henry III., and through him from the ^ Famille de 
Mancel ' so renowned in Norman days, with origins 
in Norman dukes and Saxon kings. Elizabeth Man- 
sell his daughter, in a letter of the time written be- 
fore her marriage, is described as ' a genteel pretty 
girl and a good dancer.' It is more to the purpose 
that she was a painter of considerable merit, a gift 
which she inherited from her clever mother, and which 
has come down to her children and grandchildren. 

Lieutenant Richard Frederick Angelo and his 
young wife sailed for India in July, 1830, and a few 
years saw them settled in the old city of Delhi, where 
Elizabeth unhappily died. She lies in the now disused 
cemetery of the old cantonment out in the wilder- 
ness beyond the historic Ridge, her tombstone re- 
cording her death-tale, namely that she died on 
7 October, 1 840, aged thirty-six, the mournful day on 
which she gave birth to her last child, Marianne 
D'Oyley Angelo (who dying herself in 1843 ^^^^ ^7 
her mother's side).^ 

^ Record ceases (Jrmy Records, India Office). 
2 Mon. Insc. 


Richard Frederick Angelo having attained the 
rank of lieutenant-colonel, died at Lucknow in 1854. 

Death. — 13th Dec. 1854, at Lucknow died Lieut. Colonel 
Richard Angelo, 34th Bengal Infantry {G.M. vol. 43, p. 438). 

His tomb, with many others, was utterly de- 
stroyed by the mutineers in 1857. His will bears 
date ' 16 November, 1854.' He mentions his 'chil- 
dren, Emily, wife of John Blackburne Hawkes, Esq., 
Captain H.M.'s 3rd Light Dragoons ; Richard Fisher 
Angelo, Alfred Mansell Angelo, and Bessie Castell 
Angelo,' among whom he divides his estate equally. 
He appoints as principal executor his ' brother John 
Angelo, a Lt.-Colonel of Invalids, Bengal Establish- 

His first child by Elizabeth Mansell was a girl 
deceased in infancy, and the following is the inscrip- 
tion on her tomb in the South Park Street Cemetery, 
Calcutta : — 

Sacred to the memory of Adelaide Charity, infant daughter of 
Lieut. Richard and Mrs. Angelo, 34th Reg. N.L Died 14th 
December 1832 aged 9 months and 25 days. 

Emily was born at Churi Punji and baptized 
in Calcutta : — 

Emily daughter of Richard Frederick Angelo, Lieut. 34th N.L 
and Elizabeth his wife, born at Chooree Poonjee loth Dec. 1853, 
baptized at Calcutta 23rd January, 1834, by Henry Fisher, Senior 
Presidency Chaplain (Registers, Old St. John's, Calcutta). 

She still lives (1903), the widow of Captain John 
Blundell Hawkes. Bessie Castell Angelo also still 
survives, and lives unmarried in Guernsey. 

Of Colonel Richard Frederick Angelo's two sons, 
Richard Fisher and Alfred Mansell^ the latter perished 
prematurely in circumstances of unusual sadness, and 
his story therefore we shall treat of first. 

This unfortunate young ofl^cer was born in India 
on 25 June, 1837. Having fulfilled the usual course 
at home, he landed in Calcutta full of promise, and 
was posted to the ist Native Infantry. Delhi how- 
ever had strong attractions for him. There he was 
born, and there lay all that was mortal of his gifted 


mother. To Delhi therefore he would go. At his 
own request he was transferred immediately from 
the I St Native Infantry to the 54th, then stationed 
at Delhi, and he was transferred the very month before 
the outbreak of the Mutiny^ namely on 3 April, 1857.^ 
Within six weeks he met his fate, and though no one 
knows the exact circumstances, they must have been 
as barbarous as most of the horrors of that doleful 
time. The following extract records the fact : — 

Death. May 14th, 1857. Massacred, supposed by villagers, on 
his way to Meerut after escaping from Delhi, aged 19, Alfred 
Mansell Angela, Ensign 54th Bengal N.I., second and youngest son 
of the late Colonel Richard Angelo, 34th B.N. I., formerly Com- 
mandant of the Delhi Palace Guards (fi.M. new ser. vol. 3, 
p. 465). 

Richard Fisher Angelo. We now come to the 
eldest son, still happily living, the only member of 
the Angelo family who has the glory of honourable 
mention in Kaye's and Malleson's History of the Indian 
Mutiny, He also was born in India, as the extract 
following shows : — 

Richard Fisher Angelo son of Richard Frederick Angelo and 
of Bessie his wife, Captain 34th Native Infantry, born 3rd Sep- 
tember, 1835, baptized at Calcutta 21st September, 1835, V 
Henry Fisher, Senior Presidency Chaplain {Registers, Old St. John's, 

Not five years old when his mother died, he re- 
mained with his father at Delhi, and going to Eng- 
land when scarcely fourteen was left there in charge 
of his aunt Charity Mansell, living at Hammersmith, 
when Colonel Angelo returned to duty in India in 
1849. the two, father and son, ever meet 

again, for the son heard of the father's death at Aden 
about a month after the event when he was going 
out himself as an ensign in 1855. 
chances of an Indian career ! 

Richard Fisher Angelo of the Bengal Staff Corps 
joined the old 41st Native Infantry, the 'Dread- 
noughts,' as fifth ensign in 1855. Like his father 
and his uncles he had a very distinguished career, 

^ Army Records^ India Office. 

W ^ 

_ Vl-i 

4 ^ 


o oo 

bo 4j w, 
^ -g C « oo 

H 7 fa ^' J 

-o o 
2 c 

P W 00 00 


«u £ 

o c n 
» > U « -5 < 



-> o 

'< O -J^ « 

• CS W O o cw 

E- It < s u 

(u n w 2 o c 

< W eq 2 


» 4J oo 

< < ^ 

-o re 

■5b JS 

Oj .ii ttj C/3 ONvo 

^ ? H c;^^' 

O rn. 

< j£ 

« t^oo . 
bo M i-i 




^ *2 re <Li t\ re 

ho g C! ^ bo w 

^ W < J3 II 

«J rs « 
- c .ii 

£ o o S 
•cq Q Uh M 

IS § 

^ fa 

J re OS 

U "2 13 

bo C bo 
O C 

£ < 

I O „ 

i o 

- 3 bo 

o c 

2: c3 
fa < 

-T3 S 


Mrs. Jane Bland, mother of Mrs. Anthony 
Angelo, with an Angelo grand-daughter. 


winning to himself much glory for personal gallantry 
in the Indian Mutiny, particularly in the Rohilkand 
and Oude Expeditions of 1858, when he was doing 
duty with the First Punjab Infantry. He was pre- 
sent at the actions of Terai Forest, Nujidabad, 
Naghina, Moradabad, Dujra Nali, Bareilly, Shakje- 
haupur. Fort Banai, Mahumdi and Badian/ On two 
occasions, at the sharply contested actions of Naghina 
and at Dujra Nali, he was recommended by his com- 
manding officer for the Victoria Cross, but the General 
under whom he was serving, 'Jones the Avenger,' 
refused to pass on his name. What was his reason ? 
The Victoria Cross had been only recently instituted, 
and undoubtedly, among many of the British officers 
of that time, a feeling which afterwards found strong 
expression in the 'Times in connection with this very 
case was said to prevail to the effect that the Vic- 
toria Cross, instituted during the Crimean War, was 
a reward and a decoration intended only for officers of 
the British Army, and not at all for officers of ' black 
regiments,' to adopt the disparaging language of the 
time. At any rate Lieutenant Richard Angelo's name 
was not passed on — he was simply told to ' do it 
again' ! At Dujra Nali he did 'do it again,' his 
good fortune giving him another chance in an affair 
which demanded unusual resolution and singular 
gallantry. But again the general is said to have de- 
murred, on the ground that Angelo was the only 
officer whose name had been handed in for the 
coveted distinction. 'You cannot expect,' said he, 
' that I should forward a recommendation for a " black 
officer " (meaning an officer in a native regiment) 
when no " white officer " has been recommended.' 
And thus the youngster missed his well-earned reward 
the second time ! 

Just before Dujra Nali, however, namely at Mora- 
dabad, Richard Angelo's star had also shone benignly, 
and there also, by an act of exceptional gallantry, 
though he did not even then ' win his spurs,' he had 
challenged the admiration of the force. Kaye and 

1 IVar Services, Official, July, 1895. 



Malleson, nay, the General Commanding, shall pub- 
lish the story themselves, and if these pages should 
be read by Lord Roberts, the Commander-in-Chief, I 
trust that even now, though so late in the day, the 
chief actor in that historic scene may receive his due 
meed of reward for service so frankly and handsomely 

In Kaye and Malleson's book, which will remain 
the standard work on the Indian Mutiny for many a 
year to come, Angelo's exploit at the assault and cap- 
ture of Moradabad on 26 April, 1858, is described 
as follows : — 

In this affair Lieutenant Angelo greatly distinguished himself. 
Bursting open the door of one of the houses, he seized a prominent 
rebel leader and one of his sons. Whilst engaged in this work he 
was fired at from one of the upper rooms of the house. He at 
once rushed upstairs, forced the door of the room whence the firing 
had proceeded, and found himself face to face with seven armed 
men. Nothing daunted, he shot three of them with his revolver 
[which then jammed], and kept the remainder at bay with his sword 
till reinforced from below (vol. iv. p. 365). 

The General's forwarded account of this affair is 
in a Despatch which is even more graphic, since it 
shows the relative position of the upper-storeyed 
room from which the firing proceeded. We quote 
it as published in the London Gazette of 28 July, 1858, 
merely remarking that Jones' brief note in forward- 
ing the report tallies well with his alleged refusal to 
back up the young officer's claims : — 

From Brigadier General J. Jones, C.B. commanding the Roor- 
kee Field Force. Dated Camp, Moradabad, April 28th, 1 858. 

I would beg to draw the attention of His Excellency to the gallant 
conduct, as related in this report, of Lieutenant Richard Fisher 
Angelo, 1st Punjaub Infantry: — 

[Report.] The capture of the Nawab (Muja Khan) was efifected 
by Lieutenant Angelo, doing duty with the 1st Punjaub Infantry, 
who deserves great credit for his spirited conduct on the occasion. 
This officer, having burst open the door of the room in which the 
Nawab and his sons were concealed and having captured them, was 
fired on by the guard of the Nawab, who were in a room in an upper 
storey commanding the house in which the Nawab was concealed. 
Lieutenant Angelo rushed up the narrow stairs leading to this room, 
burst open the door, and, single-handed, entered the room, shot 


three men with his revolver, and, on being joined by some of his 
men, captured the rest of the guard. 

On reading these authentic accounts of a most 
meritorious and gallant action, is there a single officer 
among all those brave men wearing the Victoria Cross 
this day who would not admit that for this one deed 
of daring Lieutenant Angelo richly deserved to wear 
it too ? 

Lieutenant Richard Fisher Angelo remained with 
the 1st Punjaub Infantry (Coke's Rifles) for three 
years, when the regiment (originally raised for only 
three months for some trifling frontier affuir) was 
disbanded, the officers insisting on getting their dis- 
charge to enjoy their plunder at home. As Angelo's 
own regiment, the 41st, had mutinied in 1857 at 
Etawa, he took up a course at the Civil Engineers' 
College at Roorkee, and joined the Public Works 
Department. In December, 1866, he resigned the 
Public Works, and in 1867 he was posted, strangely 
enough to the new 41st (Gwalior) Infantry at Agra. 
He rejoined the Department of Public Works as 
Personal Assistant to the Chief Engineer, N.W. Pro- 
vinces, and on being relieved served successively in 
the 43rd (Assam) Light Infantry and the ist Native 
Infantry at Agra (1870). On i August, 1883, he 
retired from the service as Lieutenant-Colonel, and 
settled at Naini Tal. 

Richard Fisher Angelo married at Christmas, 
1863, Elizabeth, the daughter of James Tiernan, Chief 
Engineer of the British India Steam Navigation Com- 
pany. She was born at Bombay in 1 849. Her mother 
was of pure Armenian descent ; her maiden name was 
Alexander, and she was kinswoman of the Aratoru 
Apcars, the well-known Armenian merchants of Cal- 
cutta. Colonel Angelo's sons, all born in India, are : 
(i) Alfred ; (2) Richard, of the Burma Military 
Police, who served in the Burma War of 188 6-7 ; 
(3) Frederick, of the British South African Constabu- 
lary, who went through the South African Campaign 
( 1 899-1 902) ; and (4) Michael Angelo, now at school 
in Guernsey. He has also had several daughters, of 
whom Elizabeth, Louisa Oldfield, Dorothea, and 



Florence are married, and Beatrice unmarried. The 
decline of his days he spends at the beautiful hill 
station of Mussoorie. 

I have no precise information whatever regarding the 
families into which married the various daughters of Anthony 
Angelo Tremamondo. Two of them at least remained un- 
married, namely, Maria and Georgiana, who are said to have 
lived together, and it is curious and interesting to find that 
with them the discarded name ' Tremamondo ' remained up to 
a late period, as witness the following extract : — 

Admon. — Jan. 23rd, 1857, Maria Angelo Tremamondo, otherwise 
Maria Angelo, late of 6 St. George's Road, Shepherd's Bush, spinster, 4,000. 
Letters of administration granted to Rosalinda Helena Castell, widow, the 
nutural and lawful sister, and one of the next of kin. 




■yy >^ TT^ i ^ I ^HE housc of Berkeley, although ancient, 

powerful, and rich, never attained in its 
greatest day to the first rank amongst the old 
English lords. But they remained always 
amongst the great barons of the land, and as 
house by house disappeared from the checker- 
board of history a rare distinction became 
theirs. The lord of Berkeley came to be the 
only English lord who still lived on in the castle which had 
sheltered his first forefathers, that castle being Berkeley itself, 
from which his race had drawn their name when surnames 
were first a-making. 

After the conquest of England Berkeley is found in the 
hands of a family which farmed it from the Crown, and under 
whom the castle first rose. It is probable that there was a 
castle at Berkeley when Henry Beauclerk kept there his 
Easter in 1121, the guest of Roger of Berkeley. Roger's 
heir, another Roger who followed Stephen in the troublesome 
times, is named as the finisher of the first work, so that Berkeley 
may rank with those new castles which, filled with devils rather 
than men, moved to wailing the chronicler of those days of 

In the time of this Roger there dwelt at Bristol one Robert 
son of Harding, an alderman and a merchant, and a man of 
sound judgement in his political speculations. When Berkeley 
Castle was sending lances to the help of King Stephen, the 
money of this long-headed alderman was aiding the Empress 
Maude and her son Henry. Some two years before he came 
to an English throne Henry fitz Empress gave his enemy's 
castle of Berkeley, with its dependencies called Berkeley Her- 
ness, to Robert of Bristol, the son of Harding, and confirmed 
the gift under his seal when Stephen's death had made of him 
a king. 

Four centuries later good Master John Smyth of Nibley, 
steward of the hundred of Berkeley, and for fifty years the 



servant of its lords, sought for the birth and ancestry of Robert 
son of Harding, and leaves his seeking at the last with 
the word that ' the heades of great houses are often found as 
uncertaine as the beginnyngs of great rivers.' 

There were those before Master Smyth who had set about 
their work with more assurance. The first pedigree of 
Robert's descendants of which we are made aware was framed 
by the learned John Trevisa, vicar of Berkeley in 135 1. 
With him, so far as may be seen, begins the long accepted tale 
which would make the origin of the Berkeleys at once Danish, 
royal and improbable. Another churchman, John Newland, 
abbot of St. Austin's by Bristol from 148 1 to 151 5, takes up 
the parson's tale, and records for all time that Sir Robert fitz 
Harding was son and heir of Harding, which Harding was 
second son of the King of Denmark. All this in a document 
which judges of the common pleas under Elizabeth were to 
hold for ' an inestimable peece of evidence.' The presence of 
this Harding in Bristol is easily accounted for by a law of the 
land of Denmark, under which all younger sons of its kings, 
for the avoiding of wars of succession, were forced to leave 
their fatherland and take foreign service. 

Master Smyth, with the good genealogical instinct of one 
who as steward of scores of manors had been wont to ask better 
evidence of ancestry than hearsay or an old tale, seeks in vain 
for the text of this harsh Danish law, and ferrets amongst the 
pedigrees of northern kings for a father for Harding. ' Some 
small labor,' he says, 'I lost in searching after the line of 
Squantiber the First,' yet Harding is at last left at the top of 
a pedigree which Master Smyth's conscience will not allow him 
to adorn with Squantiber's splendidly decorative name. 

But Harding remains royally Danish, and rushes into 
Master Smyth's first paragraphs of the Lives of the Berkeleys : 
when 'to the rendevous of Duke William hasteth Harding a 
yonger sonne of the King of Denmarke.' Duty to the great 
house asked for nothing less, although the old steward remains 
uneasy, seeing that ' divers lerned gentlemen studious in 
antiquities ' have doubted the very existence of this eager prince- 
ling. But he comforts himself. Learned Camden believed the 
story, and industrious Stowe. The family believed it and so 
did the heralds, but with a book before us of pedigrees of the 
great and noble compiled by a herald of John Smyth's time we 
cannot believe that these officers were hard to persuade. In 


Master Smyth's opinion a good evidence was to be found over 
the gate of the monastery at Bristol where ' an antient 
marmoriall inscription ' hailed King Henry II. and Sir Robert 
fitz Harding, /////J regis Dacie as founders, but the date of the 
setting up of this marble is not inquired for. At the last 
Master Smyth leaves Harding and Squantiber with a wise saw: 
* Boni venatoris est aliquid capere^ non omnia. Hee is held a good 
Huntsman that can catch some game through not all.' 

Even in the t ime of John Smyth of Nibley the eyes of 
genealogists were already upon a more probable father for 
Robert of Bristol than the King of Denmark's wandering son. 
Harding son of Alnod or Ealdnoth held in Domesday Book 
the manor of Meriet in Somerset. His son and heir Nicholas 
fitz Harding inherited his father's fief, which he certified in 
1 1 66 to be two and a half knight's fees in Somerset. From 
this Nicholas descended the knightly family which took name 
from their manor of Meriet. Here at least was a west-county 
Harding to hand, and beyond him the possibility of another 
ancestor for whom one need not grope in cartularies — 
Eadnoth the staller, who had been killed two years after the 
conquest when leading the Somerset men against those sons 
of Harold who had raided the coast. The links are still 
unproven, for there were many thanes of this name, any one 
of whom might have been Harding's father. 

Robert the son of Harding remains, a younger son, if we 
take him for son of Harding son of Alnod, yet the father 
of great barons whose name would endure when the Somerset- 
shire knights sprung from Nicholas son of Harding would 
be long dead and forgotten by all but pedigree-makers. And 
Robert son of Harding is more than a name and a date. The 
Bristol trade fills his coffers, his money goes to the making of 
a king, and his name travels far from Bristol. When King 
Diarmaid Macmurchada, who has carried off the wife of the 
lord of Breifne, comes barelegged and saffron cloaked to 
Bristol on his way to ask help against the Irish chieftains who 
would have no more of him, he is guest of Robert the Rich. 
The alderman's banner flies over Berkeley keep, and he pre- 
pares for heaven at the last with stately providence, founding 
an abbey that he may die canon therein. Under the stalls 
of his abbey of St. Austin he is buried in 1 1 70, and his wife 
Eve, who has herself died prioress of a priory of nuns of her 
own founding, is laid beside him. 




Before his death peace was made with the dispossessed 
Berkeley's of Berkeley, who had been restored by Henry II. 
to their honour of Dursley. Roger the heir of that house 
married a daughter of Robert son of Harding, and Maurice, 
son and heir of Robert, took to wife Alice, Roger's sister. 
This older line of Berkeley ^ continued at Coberley until the 
reign of Henry IV., when a daughter of them took their lands 
by marriage to the family of Brydges. 

Maurice of Berkeley, son and heir of Robert son of 
Harding, by reason of his marriage with Alice of the old 
Berkeleys is surnamed by John Smyth ' the Make-peace, ' 
even as for every Berkeley after him the old steward has a 
nickname ready. He had two sons, and the new Berkeleys 
who rose by the favour of the house of Anjou begin early to 
be thorns in the side of the kings of that line. Robert, the 
elder son of Maurice, was a justiciar of King John, but turned 
against him with the rebellious barons, and being pardoned 
once, lost Berkeley Castle itself on a second rebellion. In 
the first year of Henry III. he was restored to all his lands 
save Berkeley, of which he died dispossessed. 

The fortune of Berkeley has more than once brought 
a second son to repair the work of his elder. Maurice's 
brother Thomas is surnamed ' the Observer or Temporizer ' 
by Master Smyth. He observed, he temporized, and in 1223 
had Berkeley back again and dwelt therein for twenty years in 
peace, but Berkeley was again in jeopardy under his son 
Maurice ' the Resolute.' This Maurice was married to Isabel 
de Creoun, whose mother was Isabel de Valence, the king's 
sister, but this kinship with the Crown did not hinder him 
from coming in arms with the barons against King Henry III. 
He died in 128 1 and Thomas his second son succeeded him, 
Maurice the elder son having been killed two years before at a 
Kenilworth tournament. 

Thomas of Berkeley the heir, called Thomas the Wise by 
Master Smyth, might better have been styled Thomas the 
Soldier. As a lad he was at the field of Evesham in the 
barons' host and came away safe and sound. After this he 

^ From Roger, their first founder, the pedigree-mongers have decided to 
trace the Scottish family of Barclay of Mathers and Urie, whom the clumsy 
Scottish heralds have fitted out nevertheless with a differenced version of the 
arms of the second family of Berkeley, and with their mitre crest, first borne 
by Thomas, lord of Berkeley, who died in 1361. 


became the king's man and had thirty marks for the warhorse 
he lost before Kenilworth. He was in the Welsh wars and in 
the wars of France. His banner was at Falkirk field and at the 
siege of Carlaverock, and he was one of the great barons who 
sealed the famous letter to the pope. At Bannockburn his 
luck failed, and we may believe that the Scots knights swooped 
eagerly upon their rich prize when the red and white banner 
went down. For his redemption the lands of Berkeley paid a 
sum which must have rejoiced many an envious Scottish heart. 
His long life in harness ended as it began with rebellion, for he 
died in 1321 a partisan of Lancaster against the king. 

His two sons Maurice and John had long followed him in 
the field, the poet of Carlaverock seeing Maurice's banner of 
the arms of Berkeley borne with a blue label * because his 
father was alive.' Maurice was a jouster and haunter of 
tournaments and Smyth has ' the Magnanimous ' for his sur- 
name. Like his father he went to the wars with sons at his 
back — Thomas, Maurice and John — and like his father he 
joined in the sturdy treason of Lancaster, for which reason 
Berkeley was again taken into the king's hand, whilst the Lord 
Maurice lay a prisoner in Wallingford hold, where he died in 
1326. His second and third sons founded cadet houses of 
their name and Thomas the heir succeeded. 

Thomas is Thomas the Rich and, in some measure, Thomas 
the Lucky. With his father and grandfather he was up against 
the king and the Despenser and fell into strong lodgings in the 
Tower of London. Here he broke prison, but was taken 
again and caged at Berkhamsted and Pevensey. But the 
times were changing. The queen and the young Prince 
of Wales brought him freedom in 1326 and he was soon at 
home again in Berkeley Castle whence the young Despenser 
was lately fled. 

The next year was the black year for Berkeley. The deed 
done there in 1327 is remembered to this day by every one 
who speaks the name of Berkeley, although its lord's hands were 
clean of that wickedness. King Edward II. was brought to 
Berkeley Castle and committed to the Lord Thomas with an 
allowance of five pounds daily so long as he should remain guest 
and prisoner. But the Lord Thomas was too mild a gaoler, and 
more than a gaoler he would not be. There were those who were 
willing where he was loath, and Maltravers and Gurney, first and 
second murderers, came to the castle, whilst Thomas Berkeley 




* with heavy cheer ' rode away to his manor house of Bradley. 
He was there whilst murder was done at Berkeley, murder in 
such hideous shape that we think of it less as the death of a 
king — kings fall in the history book unwept as chess pieces — 
than as the death of a forlorn man who dies screaming. 

The Lord Thomas was a soldier like all his line. He fought 
in Scotland, and the Douglas who laid ambush for him by night 
fled from the Berkeley lances with only three survivors of his 
adventure. But his chief service was in France, whither he went 
as a great lord with six knights, two and thirty squires, thirty 
mounted archers and two hundred a-foot. He was at Calais 
and Cressy in 1346, and on his next journey to France was one 
of the leaders of the English at the crowning mercy of Poictiers, 
from which field he led away so many prisoners, that he is said 
to have rebuilt his castle of Beverstone out of their ransoms. 

Young as the Berkeleys came to the field, none surely saw 
war earlier than Maurice the next lord, who was knighted when 
he followed his father to Scotland, being then aged seven years. 
The next year the child was wedded to a daughter of the 
Despensers, the old enemies of the house. He lived to fight 
under his father at Poictiers, where he took wounds of which 
he is said to have died long after in 1368. 

His eldest son Thomas, called the Magnificent by his 
historian, followed the family calling of war, and kept the red 
and white banner of Berkeley a familiar thing in France and 
Spain, Scotland and Wales. When the King of France sent 
ships and men to the aid of Owain of Glyndwr the Lord Berkeley 
fought them as they lay in Milford Haven. His marriage was 
a great one, with the heir of the Lord Lisle, but from this 
marriage came the woes of the Berkeleys for many generations 
to come. 

His heir male, James Berkeley, followed him in his inherit- 
ance of Berkeley, but Berkeley was in the hands of his cousin 
Elizabeth, daughter of the last lord. In her hands too were the 
muniments and evidences of Berkeley, and she was married to 
the right famous lord Richard Beauchamp, the great Earl of 
Warwick, against whom James Berkeley, a knight so poor 
that he must needs pawn the plate of his chapel for two and 
twenty marks, could plead nothing but his lawful right. 

Law and right, however, prevailed, their course being made 
easier by a thousand marks paid at a telling moment into the 
hands of the good duke Humphrey of Gloucester, and the 


Beauchamp sullenly withdrew from the castle. But Berkeley- 
had not seen the last of the Beauchamps, who came before its 
walls and sieged it again and again, rattling the roofs of the little 
town about the heads of its townsmen. The feud was carried 
on at law by the next generation, the coheir of Beauchamp 
being wife to the great Talbot, Earl of Shrewsbury, so that the 
quarrel fell into hands eager for quarrels at home and abroad. 
The ladies of both factions cast themselves in the suit, fought 
and suffered, the wife of the Lord Berkeley, although a 
Mowbray and a coheir of the Duke of Norfolk, dying a 
prisoner in Gloucester Castle. 

In 1453 William Berkeley, 'the Waste All,* succeeded as 
lord of Berkeley. In his day fell that strange battle of Nibley 
Green. For a while there had been peace between Talbot and 
Berkeley, for the aged Shrewsbury had fallen gloriously on a 
field of France and with him his son, young John Talbot, the 
Lord Lisle. A son of the Berkeleys had come by his end 
at the same time, and the heir of Lisle was a child. 

But when my young Lord Lisle came to the manly age of 
nineteen years he wrote a letter to his cousin William of 
Berkeley, ' William called lord Berkeley ' as he preferred to 
style him, proffering him a meeting at some place half way 
between his own manor house of Wotton and Berkeley Castle, 
where all feuds might be ended with their own hands. But 
William was of middle age, and by no means eager to set his 
cause upon the push of a lance. He answered young Lisle's 
letter in meet terms, deriding his new title of viscount, 'a 
new found thing,* and making tryst to meet him with ' a tenth 
part of his power.' It is evident that this last phrase the Lord 
William cast in but as a graceful boast, for the Berkeley's men 
came to the banner from far and wide. A thousand men 
came in, miners from the Forest of Dean and archers who had 
seen oversea fighting. Berkeley's brother Maurice left his 
young wife and infant son and brought in his Thornbury men, 
and beside him Philip Mead, wife's father to Maurice, led 
Bristol citizens to the aid of the house of Robert fitz Hard- 
ing of Bristol. 

The lad Lisle's forces were met at Nibley Green and scat- 
tered from an ambush. An arrow of Black Will from Dean 
Forest took the young viscount in the face, and a dagger 
ended him. The Berkeleys followed the rout as far as his 
manor of Wotton, which they sacked and plundered, the fear 



of them bringing the Lady Lisle to bed of a dead son, the 
last of his house. 

This battle of Nibley Green, the last private war in Eng- 
land, was fought in such a year and month that William of 
Berkeley had never to answer for it before the law. There was 
a rising in Yorkshire, the Nevilles were leaving the king, and 
the only writ which reached Berkeley was one making its lord 
a commissioner to search out disaffected people in his country 
side. From all the troubles of the nation William of Berkeley 
held apart. To his barony he strung new titles. He was 
Earl of Nottingham in 1483. After Bosworth he was Earl 
Marshal, and to that title was added a marquessate of Berkeley. 
Half the great estates of the Norfolks and Fitzalans were his, 
yet in 149I- he justified Master Smyth's nickname by dying 
in the sanctuary of Westminster without silver to pay his 
servants' wages. 

Again the fortune of Berkeley brought a younger son to 
repair the elder's folly. Maurice ' the Lawyer ' succeeded his 
brother. Within seven years he had recovered for himself 
fifty manors illegally alienated by the waste-all lord, and though 
Berkeley was in strange hands his son and heir, another 
Maurice, had wherewithal to ruffle it at that costly court of 
Henry VIII. and to earn from Master Smyth the title of ' the 
Courtier.' This younger Maurice was followed by his brother 
Thomas, who was so little of a courtier that although once a 
soldier, as all the Berkeleys were, and made knight at Flodden, 
his whole care was to live ' a kind of grazier's life, having his 
flock of sheep sommering in one place and wintering in 
other places, as hee observed the feilds and pastures to bee 
found and could bargain but cheape ' — one of those shepherd 
lords, in fact, whom contemporary Englishmen held for the 
curse of their land. 

There comes now to the Berkeley family that change of 
lite which the Tudor rule brought to the great houses. Any 
Berkeley of the middle ages will fill a page with the story of 
his reign at Berkeley and his part in the wars for and against 
his king. The lives of the Berkeleys shrink to pedigree entries 
of birth, marriage and death. Thomas the Hopeful, Henry 
the Harmless, George the Traveller — they pass and make no 
sign. The one great event for them is the end in 1 609 of the 
great Berkeley lawsuit which had cursed and blessed the house 
for nearly two centuries, since the death of Thomas the Mag- 


nificent. The suit had vexed and impoverished them indeed, 
but had the Berkeleys been at Berkeley Castle with a full money 
chest and no private quarrel, their violent blood would have 
made them strike into the wars of the Roses, and they woula 
have perished with the rest of the ancient baronage. 

An earldom of Berkeley came in 1679 to George, Lord 
Berkeley, one of the peers who had invited King Charles to 
return. The maker of romance will grieve to read that this 
degenerate Berkeley gave a theological library to Sion College 
and was author of a religious tract widely read in its day. As 
at the right moment he who had suffered the commonwealth 
peacefully was ready to declare for King Charles, so when to 
the eyes of competent observers of the times King James's cup 
was full my lord was a subscriber to the declaration of assist- 
ance to be given to the Prince of Orange. His daughter 
Henrietta relieved the dulness of the family history by 
eloping with her sister Mary's husband, the wicked Lord 
Grey of Warke. 

James, the third earl, was on the quarter-deck of the Boyne 
when Sir George Rooke fought the French off Malaga, and 
died Vice-Admiral of Great Britain. The fourth earl com- 
manded a regiment raised in the '45 against the Pretender, but 
it does not appear that he marched that regiment to CuUoden. 
His son Frederick Augustus, fifth Earl of Berkeley, a sports- 
man and a mighty hunter of the hare, made history of a squalid 
sort by marrying in 1796 Mary Cole, the daughter of a 
Gloucestershire publican and butcher, who had already borne 
him four sons and two daughters. The mad fancy took Earl 
Frederick Augustus to legitimatize these children by the story 
of an earlier marriage at Berkeley in 1785. For this a parish 
register was produced with an entry of the marriage in the 
recognizable handwriting of the earl. For the marriage at 
Lambeth in 1796 as 'bachelor and spinster ' no valid reason 
was alleged. More children had followed the marriage of 
1796, but my lord cut off shillingless any child or legatee of 
his who should question the marriage of 1785. So it came to 
pass that the sixth Earl of Berkeley lived and died as Mr. 
Berkeley. The Earl of Berkeley of to-day is the eighth earl, 
but the ancient barony of Berkeley passed to Mrs. Milman, 
niece of the sixth earl, and Berkeley Castle is the seat of a 
Berkeley, Lord Fitz Hardinge by a patent of 1861. 

O. B. 




FOR the studiously inclined no more attractive resort 
could well be imagined than Chetham's Library on a 
bright summer day. In the very centre of bustling modern 
Manchester, an arched doorway in the stone wall opens 
into the comparative seclusion of a courtyard, peopled with 
boys in picturesque costume of blue, after the fashion of a 
bygone generation. On the further side is a range of buildings 
in the style of the fifteenth century. This is Chetham's Hos- 
pital. The library occupies a wing on the left hand. Passing 
through a wicket and up the stairs, the visitor finds himself in a 
long gallery, filled with range upon range of tall oaken presses. 
At the end of a shorter gallery at right angles to the first is the 
reading room. Here is a haven of repose from the heat and 
glare of the streets, the turmoil, the grime and the din. Shafts 
of light from an oriel window are reflected by richly panelled 
walls and dark antique furniture. Over the carved fireplace 
is the founder's portrait. A striking head it is, and excellently 
reproduced, framed in white rufF and embroidered cap ; with 
great hooked nose and eagle eyes, high cheekbones, a wide 
firm mouth and strong prominent chin, the lines scarcely 
softened and no way disguised by the thin beard. 

Here, it is said, at the point where Irk flows into Irwell, 
once stood the castle of the Norman barons of Manchester. 
From Grelle the inheritance passed in the fourteenth century 
to de la Warre. The last male of this latter house was church- 
man first and baron afterwards. Before succeeding to his 
brother's hall and lordship, he had been rector of the church 
hard by ; and having no heirs to say him nay, he turned his 
rectory into a college or corporation, consisting of a master or 

^ Life of Humphrey Chetham^ Founder of the Chetham Hospital and Libraiy, 
Manchester, by the late Francis Robert Raines, M.A., F.S.A., vicar of Miln- 
row and hon. canon of Manchester Cathedral, and Charles W. Sutton, M.A., 
hon. secretary of the Chetham Society ; with a Genealogy of the Chetham 
Family, by Ernest Axon : two volumes. Manchester : Printed for the Chet- 
ham Society (new series, vols. 49, 50), 1903. 


warden and eight priests, and dismantled the baronial halls 
of his ancestors to house them. Two centuries passed. The 
baron's foundation had, in mutilated form, survived the re- 
formation ; but only to outlive its use and purpose. Scandals 
and bickerings were rife. The revenues were grievously mis- 
managed ; the warden and fellows had ceased to reside. Hum- 
phrey Chetham in his lifetime exerted himself to reform and 
remodel the institution ; and its buildings, which had been for a 
century in possession of the Stanleys, were purchased after 
his death by his executors and feoffees. From that time they 
have been the home of a new foundation, better suited to the 

Thus has time brought his revenges. The third and latest 
founder, to whose work the baron's hall and the churchman's 
college have given place, sprang of a line which flourished 
there, it is believed, before ever the Norman came. Man- 
chester possesses other fine libraries now ; but that founded 
by Chetham has still its place, and a charm that none can 
boast. Moreover during the last century it became the home 
of a learned body, which has published already above eight 
score volumes upon the history and antiquities of the sur- 
rounding districts, and still promises more. The society 
adopted, as was fitting, Chetham's name ; and has at length, 
after many delays, issued a biography of the founder, the 
materials being drawn chiefly from his own papers, a rich col- 
lection of which has long been among the treasures upon his 

Cheetham is the name of a township lying a mile or two 
to the northward, within the ancient bounds of Manchester 
parish. Canon Raines calls it also parcel of the barony ; but 
in the next sentence states, more correctly, that it was held in 
thanage, in King John's time, by Roger (not Robert) de Mid- 
dleton, lord also of that manor. In 12 10 Henry de Chetam 
was his undertenant ; holding also four bovates of land in chief, 
in thanage, the locality of which is not stated.^ To Henry 
succeeded Sir GeoflFrey de Chetam, perhaps his son, sherifl^ of 
the county 1259-61. The latter was dead in 1274, leaving a 
widow called Margery de Greyleye,^ but no issue. 

At a later date his manors of Cheetham and Crompton were 

^ Knight's fee |-. Testa de Nevil. 

^ In 1276. Assize Roll 405, m. 3d. 



held, in moieties, by families named Chetham. and Pilkington. 
To account for their several estates, Mr. Axon has adopted a 
theory that Sir Geoffrey had two sisters, Alice wife of Alex- 
ander de Pilkington,^ and Christian wife of Sir Richard de 
TrafFord, from whom he derives the later house of Chetham. 
For the first of these ladies he produces no evidence at all. 
The second does occur, in a fine of 1278, as wife of William 
de Hackyng, or de la Hackyng, holding dower of the Traf- 
ford inheritance in Stretford, Chorlton and Withington. But 
if she was previously married to TraflFord, it does not follow 
that she was mother of his children, or all of them. By 
another fine, of the same term, she and her husband assure to 
Geoffrey de Chaderton a moiety of the two manors above 
mentioned, with property in Sholver, Coventry, Manchester, 
Aston, Chorlton, Withington, Middleton, Wolstanholme and 
Butterworth, subject to a heavy rent to Christiana during her 

Further evidence, of which none of the editors seem to 
have been aware, is found in the great assize roll of 1292.^ 
At this date another Christian, wife of William son of Robert 
de Staynringes, was claiming, as heir of Geoffrey de Chetham, 
one third of a messuage and appurtenances in Manchester 
from Geoffrey de Chaderton and Roger de Pilkington on a 
writ of mort cT ancestre ; but was defeated upon an error in the 
writ, which described the deceased as her brother instead of 
her uncle. In a second suit, she claims, as heir of Geoffi-ey de 
Bracebridge her brother, a messuage, 60 acres of land, 30 acres 
of meadow, 30 acres of wood, 100 acres of pasture, and rents 
of 18^. and four barbed arrows in Sholver from the same 
Geoffrey and Roger (who were tenants of the messuage and 
land), Adam de Himpetres or del Impetres, William son of 
Henry de Oldom, and Robert atte HuUe (who between them 
owed the rents). The principal defendants produced a grant 
and quitclaim by Christiana and her husband ; and after hear- 
ing the witnesses therein named, the jury found for the deed, 
and judgment was given for the defendants. 

The Bracebridges were originally from Lincolnshire. A 

^ Mr. Farrer {Lane. Fines, ii. 35//) alleges that Roger de Pilkington married 
Ellen, sister of Sir Geoffrey de Chetham ; and that the manors of Cheetham 
and Crompton descended to their son Alexander, but gives no evidence for 
that statement. 

^ Assize Roll 408, mm. 1 1, I5d. 


good deal earlier Robert de Bracebridge had a grant from 
Albert de Grelle of land of his demesne in Manchester, still 
held by his heirs in 1210/ Geoffrey de Bracebridge occurs 
in 1284, 1285 and 1288.^ From the assize roll of 1292, al- 
ready cited, we learn that he had a wife Ermelina ; for her 
executors, Herbert de Grelle and Geoffrey son of Geoffrey de 
Chaderton, were suing his executors, Geoffrey de Chaderton 
and Henry de Trafford. It seems that he also left a widow 
named Ellen, who was at the same time suing Trafford.' 
Christian apparently had a daughter named Margery, who 
married Adam de Rossendale ; and they sued the same defend- 
ants in 1306, under a writ of mort ancestre^ for the property 
she had claimed, now described as two messuages, 160 acres 
\ rood of land, 40 acres of meadow, 40 acres of wood, and 
the rents as above. The jury found that Geoffrey de Brace- 
bridge, Margery's uncle, died thereof seised ; and judgment 
was given against Geoffrey de Chaderton for one messuage 
and half the lands, the rents excepted ; the other defendants 
escaping on technical pleas.* Litigation however still went 
on ; and it would seem that Margery wife of Robert de Ash- 
ton, who was suing Chadertons, Pilkingtons and the rest in 
13 13, was the same person. With all reserve therefore I put 
forward the following pedigree, as the more probable account 
of Chetham's heirs : — 

Henry de Chetham, 121 o, 1227 

Sir Geoffrey de Chetham= Margery de ... de=Christian sister and=: William de 
1235, dead 1274, s.p. Grelle, 1276 Bracebridge I heir [m. 2 ?] Sir Hacking, 
j Richard de Trafford 1278 

Ermelina = Geoffrey de Bracebridge=Ellen Christian wife of William de Staynringes 
1284-8, dead 1290, s.p. 1292 1292, heir to her brother and uncle 

Margery wife of Adam de Rossendale 
1306-10, heir to her uncle= 

^ T^esta de Nevil. 

2 Assize Rolls 1265, m. zjdi. ; 1268, m. 26 ; 1277, m. 31. 

3 Ibid. 408, m. j^,plactta querelaruniy m. 2, Jines and amerc. m. 10. 
* Ibid. 420, m. 9. For the issue of Margery see Lane, FineSy ii. 3. 



Canon Raines' statement, that Geoffrey de Chadderton had 
received his estate in Cheetham from his father Richard de 
Trafford, involves perhaps a double error. The evidence, as we 
have seen, is that he acquired it from Christian de Hacking ; 
and, for aught that appears, by purchase/ Moreover the first 
Geoffrey de Chaderton,^ son of Sir Richard, had a son 
Geoffrey, who was very probably party to the fine of 1278. 
The younger Geoffrey at any rate held the Chetham estates in 
1292, and also in 13 17, when by two deeds he settled a con- 
siderable portion of them, namely the moiety of his manor of 
Crompton and a certain part of his lands in ShoUer, upon 
Cecily daughter of William le Bagger of Crompton, and her 
sons Gilbert and Thomas. Nearly sixty years later these 
settlements gave rise to a lawsuit, the record of which supplies 
direct evidence of the descent of the later Chethams. The 
lady was, no doubt, the Cecily who occurs elsewhere as wife of 
Adam, the grantor's son and heir apparent ; and her son the 
Gilbert de Chaderton of 1355.^ Apparently the settlements 
were ill drawn ; for the effect of them was to carry the settled 
property out df her husband's family to the lady's collateral 
heirs, after the death of her two sons without issue. Henry 
de Crompton, the plaintiff in 1376, was son of Robert brother 
of Cecily. The principal defendant was Thomas son of John 
de Chetam, cousin and heir of Geoffrey de Chaderton, namely 
son of John, son of Adam, son of the said Geoffrey. John 
son of Adam de Chaderton, named as a witness to the disputed 
deeds, was no doubt defendant's father, and son of Adam by a 
former wife.* We thus get a pedigree of the second house of 
Chetham, as follows : — 

^ How Pilkington's estate was acquired, I am not aware of any evidence 
to show. There seems no reason to assume that it was by inheritance either. 
There is no mention of coparcenery in the records cited ; and no distinction 
apparently between the estate of Pilkington and that of Chaderton. 

^ The date of his death I have not been able to fix. It took place before 
1292, when Henry, his son and heir, had succeeded. Geoffrey, one of his 
younger sons, and Geoffrey son of Geoffrey, occur together then and at later 
dates. The Chadertons were a numerous family, and their pedigree is very 
obscure ; for the generations overlap, and the same Christian names are re- 
peated again and again. 

^ Assize Roll, Due. Lane. 4. Cecily was still living in 1346. 

^ Ibid. 1485 m. 19. There are numerous defendants, including Robert 
son of John de Chetam, and Ellen daughter of John de Chetam. Cecily is 
called * mother ' of John in one deed (Raines MSS. in the Chetham Library, 


Sir Richard de TrafFord, succ. 1221 

Henry de TrafFord of TrafFord 
son and heir=: 

GeofFrey de Chaderton, dead 1292 

I I 2 

Henry de Chaderton of Chaderton . . . =: Geoffrey de Chaderton of Chetham=: Joan 1- 

son and heir, 1292 = 

Crompton, etc., 1292, 13 17 

I I 2 

= Adam de Chaderton= Cecily dau. of William le Bagger GeofFrey 
son and heir I of Crompton, 1317-46 

John de Chetham, son and Gilbert 
heir occurs 13 17, dead 1376 s.p. 


Thomas de Chetham Robert 
1376 = 1376 


The descendants of Thomas were for many generations 
seated at Nuthurst, a freehold property in or near Cheetham, 
granted to Geoffrey son of Richard de Trafford by William de 
Eccles clerk, who had interests also in Whickleswick.^ He in- 
herited it from a brother Thomas, grantee of Henry de Chetam. 
The purchaser seems to have made it a younger son's portion. 
In the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries a branch of the family 
were tenants in Crumpsall, at the northern extremity of the 
township of Cheetham, and with them we are more particularly 

Humphrey Chetham was the fifth son of Henry Chetham 
of Crumpsall gentleman, who held Crumpsall by lease from 
Prestwich of Hulme, with freeholds of his own inheritance in 
Kersal, Ashton and Manchester. He was baptized at the 
collegiate church of Manchester lo July 1580; and in due 
course apprenticed, as his eldest brother James had been, to 

xxiv. f. 293), but that must mean stepmother, or her nephew could not be 
her heir at law. 

^ Stepmother of Adam, in a deed of 26 Edw. I. (Raines MSS. xxiv. f. 293). 
^ Ancestor, iv. 208. 



Samuel Tipping of Manchester linen draper, with whose family- 
he was connected by marriage. After his apprenticeship, his 
father having died, and left him ^^40 for his portion, he spent 
some time with his elder brother George, a former apprentice 
of George Tipping, who was in business in London.^ Then 
the returned, and established himself at Manchester, trading 
here in partnership with George Chetham in London, until 
shortly before the latter's death, which took place at the end 
of 1626. Their business was chiefly in fustians, 'cottons,' 
and other textiles, already the staple product of Manchester, 
Bolton and the surrounding district. The business prospered. 
When the partnership was renewed in 1619, their joint stock 
was valued at 10,000 ; and his brother's death without 
children left the whole of it in Humphrey's hands. Instead 
of taking a new partner, he entered into an arrangement with 
George Chetham, his eldest brother's eldest son, who took up 
his residence in the firm's London house as his uncle's agent or 

Of these and other details his biographer presents a some- 
what bald narrative, interspersed with extracts from the Chetham 
papers. To produce a work of art, to make the dead live 
again, to carry us back with him to times long past, diligence 
is not enough ; a writer must have at his command knowledge, 
imagination, literary skill. Chetham's commercial and public 
career began in the first years of the Stuart dynasty, and lasted 
until the Commonwealth. Those papers of his, the corre- 
spondence with his partner, agent and friends in London, must 
surely reflect and illustrate more fully the public events of the 
day. The partnership accounts, full and methodical as they 
are said to be, should offer a rare opportunity to the historian 
of commerce. With their aid he might lift for us the veil, and 
show the thriving merchant in his home and in his counting- 
house, trace again the course of business in a bygone age, and 
describe one stage in the growth of a great industrial com- 
munity. We may hope that more will yet be made of this 

Like most successful traders, we find Chetham investing a 
part of his profits in real estate. In 1621 the partners were 
joint purchasers of Clayton Hall, with the park, manor, and 

^ George is several times described as citizen and grocer ; but Canon 
Raines makes him a member of the Merchant Taylors* Company. 


mill, and property in Failsworth, Droylsden, Manchester, 
Ashton and Woodhouses. This estate, long the seat of the 
Byrons, was settled upon the survivor, and thus accrued to 
Humphrey six years afterwards. In the interval he had ac- 
quired other lands in the same neighbourhoods. In 1628 he 
purchased Turton Tower, the seat of the Orrells, with the 
manor, mill and lands, and a private chapel in Bolton church, 
which it was found necessary to restore. These manors, with 
lands in Harwood, Westleigh, and Horwich, and in Bolton 
nigh Bolland, county York, being himself childless, he settled 
before his death upon his nephew George, heir of Crumpsall, 
and head of that branch of the family. Upon Edward 
Chetham, George's brother, he settled also a considerable 
landed estate in Ordsal, Pendleton and Salford, which was a 
later purchase from the Radcliffes. At the time of his death 
the lands of Banester of Brightmet and of Tatton of Withen- 
shaw in Cheshire were in his possession as mortgagee. The 
apologies of his biographer for such transactions were surely 
uncalled for. 

College leases were another form of investment that proved 
attractive. It was as a lessee apparently, in the first instance, 
that he became involved in the unseemly disputes of the 
collegiate body, in which money matters and ecclesiastical 
differences were curiously mingled. The account given of 
these is anything but clear. Richard Johnson was elected a 
fellow in 1632, and was shortly afterwards engaged in pressing 
his side of the question before the archbishop and the Privy 
Council. In all this he was supported by Chetham, with money, 
apparently, as well as with encouragement and advice. Their 
efforts proved successful in the end. Warden Murray was 
ousted, and a new charter obtained, with more stringent statutes. 
It says much for the conscientiousness and public spirit of the 
man that some years later, when Johnson, his friend and con- 
fidant, showed some reluctance to quit his fellowship upon be- 
coming Master of the Temple, he wrote strongly to enforce the 
duty of prompt resignation. The incident passed without im- 
pairing their good relations ; and the Master lived to take an 
active part among his old friend's feoffees, and to be his first 

The ownership of land brought other responsibilities. In 
1 63 1 Chetham was among those who were fined for refusing 
knighthood. Three years later he was chosen sheriff of the 



county, an office he by no means coveted, and received his 
commission in November. At this time the difficulties of the 
king's government were growing acute. The first writs for 
ship money, directed to the ports and maritime counties, had 
been issued a few weeks earlier. Next autumn followed the 
second levy upon the whole kingdom, the duty of assessment 
and collection being thrown upon the sheriffs. What view 
Humphrey Chetham took upon politics generally, or of this 
particular measure, we are not told. He set about his thank- 
less task in prompt and businesslike fashion. A fair assess- 
ment was speedily made ; and in a remarkably short time 
the ;£35500 demanded from Lancashire was collected and for- 
warded to London. The sheriff earned much commendation, 
and the money seems to have been paid without a murmur ; 
but a small sum which he levied to cover expenses provoked 
an outcry, and that he was peremptorily ordered to refund. 

Hitherto, it is clear, Chetham had known little of his 
pedigree, and of heraldry even less. Finding, as sheriff, that 
he was expected to display his arms, he had recourse to Randle 
Holme of Chester, first of that name, who furnished a coat, 
which was accepted with unquestioning faith. By what author- 
ity he did so is another question. But he had a fairly com- 
prehensive knowledge of family history within the Counties 
Palatine, and evidently knew a good deal about the origin of the 
Chethams; for the display of the coat in question was promptly 
followed by an information against the sheriff for usurping 
the arms of his neighbours, the ancient house of Trafford. It 
would seem from the correspondence printed by Canon Raines, 
and from a statement by Mr. Axon, that the arms and crest 
ultimately allowed by the heralds were substantially those 
devised by Randle Holme. 

The truth is that, like many families of ancient and honour- 
able lineage, for many a long day neither Chethams nor 
Chadertons had occupied a prominent position in the county. 
Belonging to the class of lesser gentry, hardly to be dis- 
tinguished from yeomen, they would have little occasion to 
use arms at all ; and the best of them could show, perhaps, 
only vague and confused tradition in favour of those they 
claimed to bear. The first Chetham to emerge in the visita- 
tions was a cadet of Nuthurst, who, in 1561, had migrated to 
Suffolk, and was there allowed for arms, silver a chevron 
gules between three fleams (elsewhere called cramp irons) sable. 


The same, or a very similar coat, may be seen, we are told, on 
the seal of a deed dated 1474/ From this time forward it 
was borne by the Lancashire Chethams in the second quarter 
of their shield ; but the fleams (if fleams they be) ^ are of 
singular form, and of varying colour, often gules. 

The arms of Chaderton were also in doubt. As Johnson 
reported, after search at the College of Arms, that family 'may 
weare the Crosse or Grifiin.' At the visitation of 1567 
(according to the printed version, Chetham Society Ixxxi.) 
* gules a cross potent gold ' was the coat quartered for Chader- 
ton by the representatives of the eldest line. The cross 
potent again crossed towards the middle point, which occupies 
the third quarter of Humphrey Chetham's shield, was 

Trafford Chetham 

avowedly meant for this coat of Chaderton. Elsewhere it is 
called a ' cross botonny nowed,' or a ' cross crosslet crossed 
towards the centre.' ^ Their alternative grifiin coat has been 

^ What legend was inscribed on this seal, or who were parties to the deed, 
Mr. Axon does not mention. 

^ They are called phleames in a letter of Mr. Johnson, and were apparently 
so interpreted by the heralds of that day. [As stamped upon the cover, the 
charges in question appear to be habicks, a weaver's tool, likely enough to be 
found upon the shield of a Manchester man. — Ed.] 

^ With this coat, I cannot help thinking, the voided cross paty of 
Pilkington must be connected. The latter has been described sometimes as 
flory, and sometimes potent. A cross flory again is a coat ascribed by 
Burke to Bracebridge, though not the usual bearing of that family. It 
should be borne in mind that a Bracebridge was heir of Sir Geoffrey de 
Chetham, and that from the partition of the manor between Chetham 
(Chaderton) and Pilkington a tradition of coheirship grew up. Moreover 
Pilkington appropriated the Trafford legend, though nothing in the situation. 



variously given in books as TrafFord undiiFerenced, TrafFord 
with a border sable bezanty or with roundels of silver, with a 
border engrailed azure, or (I think) with a plain border gules ; 
but for none of these have I ever seen satisfactory authority. 
The TrafFords themselves sealed, in the middle of the four- 
teenth century, with the arms of Grelle differenced by a bor- 
der ; and I have not seen their griffin coat earlier than the 
reign of Henry VL^ 

Finding himself thus at issue with the constituted author- 
ities, the sheriff approached the heralds in London through 
his nephew and agent, his friend Mr. Johnson, and a young 
barrister named Lightbowne. A kinsman named Wood was 
also employed in the business. The first question was as to 
his pedigree. That was settled by two certificates, one from 
James Chetham of Crumpsall, his eldest brother, the other 
from the head of the family, Thomas Chetham of Nuthurst,^ 
the latter stating that Edward Chetham, great-grandfather of 
James and Humphrey, was — 

a second brother of the bloud and lynage of my ancestors of the house of 
Nuthurst aforesaid, lawfully begot, as by my evidences more fully may appear ; 
so that I acknowledge the said Humfrey to be a kinsman of my bloud, accord- 
ing to the proof of the premises ; and do hereby give consent and allowance 
that he shall and may, without any prejudice to me or my heirs, lawfully bear 
my Arms and Crest in all places and on what occasions he pleases, with the 
difference of a second brother, surmounted by his own difference of Con- 

To this the heralds demurred, but ultimately gave way. 
The statement was accepted, and no evidences were produced. 
Mr. Axon tells us that he has seen the Nuthurst deeds him- 
self, and that they prove nothing of the sort ; also that there 
were Chethams at Crumpsall some generations earlier than the 
alleged second brother. 

The question of arms was more difficult, for the kings of 
arms were jealous of their authority and inclined to take a 
high line. The first certificate sent from Nuthurst had to be 

tenure, or known history of his lordship corresponds to it, and bore a crest in 
commemoration. Indeed the Pilkington mower is found on seals at an earlier 
date than Trafford's thresher. 

* Some church notes of the seventeenth century are, I believe, the only 
foundation for Mr. Axon's statement that the Traffords ever bore three 
griffins. There is every reason to suppose that this was the merest blunder. 

^ Also a near connection by marriage, being the brother of Isabel Chetham, 
widow of Humphrey's brother George. 


suppressed, and a second asked for, since Mr. Chetham had 
added some indiscreet tricks of arms to his text. Mr. Ryley,^ 
with whom the negotiation was carried on, evidently found 
himself in a difficult position, as other officers of arms must 
have done before and since. His clients were not quite satis- 
fied. 'And for Mr. Ryeley,' writes Johnson, 'it behoveth 
you to shewe him respect as you have done, whether hee bee 
true or false, as I feare there is a knott, and to trust him, or 
at least to seeme to trust him, may make a knave more fayth- 
full.' So far as I understand the correspondence quoted, 
Chetham was claiming the quarterly coat ultimately allowed. 
But the heralds found the second quarter recorded (in their 
SuffiDlk visitation no doubt) for Chetham of Nuthurst, the first 
and third for Chaderton. Clearly neither party knew (as 
Randle Holme perhaps did) that the claimant was all the 
time paternally descended from the latter house. The 
' paternal coat ' referred to is apparently that with the fleams ; 
and a female descent from Chaderton seems to have been con- 

What was to be done } The sheriflF was ready to accept 
the fleams and have done with it ; but that course, it was 
pointed out, after his previous display, would expose him to 
ridicule in the county. Besides there was some hint of pains 
and penalties for his unlawful assumption. ' Else,' writes 
Lightbowne, ' we fall within their [the heralds'] censure ' ; and 
again, ' Reyley said, the Gentrey of the Countrey would ex- 
pect a strict prosecution.' At this point Mr. Johnson seems 
to have taken his courage in both hands, and offered Norroy 
ten pounds down to settle the job once for all, an offer that 
Sir Henry St. George very properly refused. Lightbowne's 
suggestion was more diplomatic. He wrote to say that Chief 
Baron Davenport, to whom Chetham was favourably known, 
was on the best of terms with the 'Lord Marshall, one word or 
lyne from whom might . . . appese this perturbation.' The 
hint was taken. Out of respect for Davenport Norroy again 
gave way, and granted all he was asked, adding for crest a 
demi griffin, which he had declared to be the crest of Chader- 
ton, ' onely upon the shoulder of the Griffin they have putt 
the Cross which is parcell of your Coate.' ^ 

^ No doubt William Ryley, Bluemantle. Compare Ancestor, vii. 264. 
^ The crest of Chetham, it thus appears, is invariably pictured wrong. On 
the back and cover of these volumes the cross is shown as a cross formy. On 




All that now remained was to settle about fees. Light- 
bowne writes : — 

Wee advysed with Mr. Wood what was fit to bee done to Sir Henry for 
efFectinge it, who tould us we could not give him noe lesse then Ten pieces 
(for it was in a generouse way, and therefore wee might not bee too sparinge) 
which we accordingly did ; and wee hope Sir Henry is well content, though 
hee sayd hee hath had xx'^ for the like, but because you were my Lord Chiefe 
Baron's ffriende hee said hee was well pleased with it ; though I thinke if 
other Ten pieces had beene offered him, hee would not have rejected them. 
And he procured the approbation of Garter principal Herald. Mr. Wood 
advysed us likewise to give unto Reyley 4 or 5 pieces, in respect he had tooke 
much paynes about it, and that my Lord Cheife Baron had used him as an 
Instrument to bringe Sir H. St. George unto him, and that Reyley had beene 
many times with my Lord about it : And Sir Henry St. George tould us that wee 
were much beholdinge to Reyley for his care herein : And to say the truth, 
hee hath expended much paynes about it ; soe that we gave him three peices, 
besides one peice inclosed in your Letter before. And wee gave Mr. Wood 
twoe peices for his care and paynes herein. Besides about 3^' for serchinge the 
Records, drawinge of Armes, transcribinge of the Certificate and other 
Charges &c. . . . So that in the whole it hath cost about xix". Wee have 
left your name ho^'^ in the office of Armes : And Ryley protests hee will pro- 
clayme & maynetayne your noblenes against all opponents. . . . 

They called upon your Cosen George to take out his Armes, because the 
Visitation for London is not yet [November 1635] compleated, who hath done 
accordingly, as you may perceyve by the addition in your pedigree ; It cost 
him xxx^ Wee moved to have your brother Raphe's Children putt in, and 
could not prevayle ; but they could not come to you without naminge your 
Brother James, being elder brother. 

Sir H. St. George sayth your name is Chetham, with two H and one E, 
and soe would be written. 

A curious piece of dogmatism for that period. 

So Humphrey Chetham paid his bill that his nobleness 
might be proclaimed, protesting that the arms 'are not de- 
picted in soe good Metall as those Armes wee gave for them' ; 
and ' the Heralde will double his gayne when he meets with 
a Novice * — at which comments poor Mr. Lightbowne was 
evidently nettled, for he writes again : — 

If you meane [soe good Metall] as those Armes you sent up, I conceyve 
there is no difference save onely in the Crest ... if you meane as the pieces 
of Gould wee payd for them, I easily assent, for there is soe much difference 
betwixt Paynters Gould and Current Coyne. . . . And they thought lesse 
could not bee tendered for a Pedigree ; and beinge out of Visitation, and that 

Mr. Axon's p. 68 it is a cross crosslet. On his p. 67 there is no cross at all 
In the last instance it is attributed to Chetham of Nuthurst, who was expressly 
debarred from using it by Norroy (see i. 108). 


you had made bould with anothers Crest ; — and to say Truth, I cannot yet 
satisfy myself how those Armes doe belong to Nuthurst, for the Records were 
to the contrary. But I durst not question that wee are apt to believe things 
for our Benefett. . . . Certeine I am S' H. St. George was expectant of 
more. . . . 

The readiness with which the ship money was paid might 
be taken to indicate that Lancashire as a whole was strongly 
royalist. But that would be a mistake. The adherents of 
the old faith, and most of the principal gentry, led by the 
Stanleys, were no doubt cavaliers. Many of their estates 
were afterwards sequestrated, and the list of royalist composi- 
tions is a long one. In the first year of the war the energetic 
measures taken by Lord Strange seemed likely to secure 
the county for the king ; and the successes of Prince 
Rupert, had he known how to follow them up, for a time 
almost gave victory to the royalists. Preston and Lancaster 
were long under their control, Wigan and Warrington were 
in Lord Strangers hands. Other towns were taken and re- 
taken. But in the long run the great landowners proved 
powerless to carry the county with them. From first to last 
Manchester stood firm for the Parliament. There and else- 
where Puritanism had a strong hold ; and at one moment 
Lord Strange found himself confronted by a popular rising. 
After Marston Moor, when Strange, now Earl of Derby, had 
retired to his kingdom of Man, the Roundhead party were 
able to keep the upper hand and at a later stage the invasion 
of the Scots and Langdale only ended in disaster. 

Under these circumstances it might have been feared that 
his zeal in the matter of ship money would be remembered to 
Humphrey Chetham's disadvantage. But evidently it was 
not so. When war broke out he was more than sixty years of 
age, and could not be expected to take the field in person ; 
but it seems he furnished for the parliamentary forces (whether 
willingly or of necessity) one light horse and rider, and three 
or four footmen armed with muskets, pikes and swords, wear- 
ing corslet, headpiece and bandolier ; also a drum. Both 
parties alike were ready enough to avail themselves of his tried 
integrity and business capacity. In 1641 he was named col- 
lector of subsidies granted to the king by the Short Parliament, 
a troublesome ofilice at any time, and more especially at that 
juncture. Two years later, under an order to the Deputy 
Lieutenants and Committees of Parliament of each county, 



he was made Treasurer of Lancashire, and continued to act 
year after year through the war period. Apparently the con- 
tributions assessed by Parliament came to hand in due course ; 
but requisitions poured in faster than cash to meet them ; and 
military officers were constantly pressing for payment in some- 
what peremptory terms. 

Worse difficulties were to come. To his dismay Chetham 
was nominated sheriff a second time in November 1648. He 
was now an old man, and his health had quite broken down. 
As he writes piteously ; — 

The charges of Office is a thing I matter not at all, nor the danger onely 
in that sense yo" aprehend it, for it is both my health and my life also that 
wilbee endangered. I have learned by experience that it cannot bee executed 
by mee sittinge altogether in my own howse, and to goe abroad I am not 

And again : — 

My case is this, I am almost 70 yeares of age, of a very vt^eake constitu- 
c'on ; I am not able to get on horse backe or lighte but as I am helped by 
another, nor beinge on horsebacke to ride 2 miles but with extreame paine and 
griefe, for my particular infirmity encreaseth soe upon mee that it will shortly 
bringe mee to my grave, w*^^ being sensible of I have for this halfe yeare and 
more confined myselfe for the most p*® to my owne howse and to my 

Accordingly he and his friends made every effort to get 
the appointment cancelled. But there were extraordinary 
difficulties in the way. The army followed up their remon- 
strance of November by seizing the king's person, by occupy- 
ing London, and by Pride's Purge, during the first week of 
December. It was hard enough to secure attention for every- 
day business, still harder to get anything done. The coup d'etat 
had caused great alarm. Public men hesitated to act, not 
knowing what might happen next. All the Lancashire mem- 
bers were among those expelled the house, and they thought 
it safer to withdraw altogether from town, so that help from 
them was out of the question. The ordinance appointing him 
had passed both houses, and must therefore needs be reversed 
by both ; but ' the Lords (Mr. Johnson reports) will vote 
nothinge, holdeinge it is not a ffree parliament.' A week later 
only about three peers were in attendance ; and it was doubted 
whether a resolution of theirs would hold good. The chan- 
cellor of the duchy too was a prisoner, and had been deprived 


of the duchy seal. This in the end proved most fortunate, 
since it prevented for the time the actual issue of a commission. 

January came and went, while every one was absorbed in 
watching the king's trial and execution. Late in February 
however Mr. Peter Brereton's good offices were engaged to 
make interest with Bradshaw, the Lord President, and after 
long solicitation he succeeded in his efforts, seconded by 
Colonel Alexander Rigby, not without recourse to somewhat 
dubious means. Some time before the Speaker's secretary 
'refused a liberall summe because hee would not effect it.' 
In consequence of a hint from Brereton, a certain ' Ticket ' 
was enclosed to him by Chetham, which seems to have facili- 
tated matters. 

Your inclosed letters (he writes) I delivered yesterday, with some little 
intimation what was further intended. Coll. John [Moore ?] returned me 
such an answeare as gave me no just cause to dispair of acceptance. But the 
other unto whome you are muche obliged said plainly any offer would prove 
vaine ; he had hitherto bin and resolved to continue a virgin. Unto w^^ I 
replyed somewhat of the favour received, and of your earnest desire to 
express a thankfullness. This begot some ceremonyes and complem , but 
without any signe at all in him of yeilding to my desire or retiring from 
his owne severe resolution. Yet not knowing but, like other maids, he may 
say noe and take it, I shall notwithstanding make a fair offer. . . . 

At length, early in April, one Mr. Hartley was found 
duly qualified to act as sheriff and at the same time acceptable 
to Parliament, and Humphrey Chetham was thus relieved. 
Colonel Rigby, to his credit be it said, remained immaculate. 
Plate was presented in Chetham's name to other less scrupulous 
solicitors ; and that accomplished diplomatist, Mr. Brereton, 
writes a charming letter combining the announcement of their 
superior virtue with a graceful acknowledgment of the reward 
tendered for his own services. 

Through all these years of conflict not a word of his own 
sympathies or opinions. Evidence we have that he was 
respected by all parties, trusted alike by papists and church- 
men, by the king's men and by the Parliament. At a time of 
doubt and suspicion, threatened by royalist intrigues on the 
one hand, by the violence of militant sectaries on the other, 
the moderate party fix upon him as by necessity, old and infirm 
as he is. No timeserver this ; but a strong, faithful man who 
stood rather for justice, order and good governance than for 
any party. A man in whose face vigour is mated with self- 



control. Moreover, if somewhat austere, a generous, kindly- 
man, of whose more intimate relations one would fain be better 
informed. A man of culture too, whose letters, even on plain 
business topics, have a certain distinction ; one who valued 
good learning, though his own teachers are but conjectured. 
A patient, far-seeing man, prudent in business, quietly zealous 
for the public weal, capable of planning for the future, whose 
work would stand the test of time. 

During the latter part of his life Chetham's mind was 
occupied with benevolent schemes. His biographer suggests 
that, even in his partner's lifetime, nearly thirty years before 
his own death, there had been some understanding on the 
subject. Several draft wills, which he left among his papers, 
show that the plan of the hospital very gradually matured. 
Already for some years he had been finding board and education 
for poor boys, twenty-two in number, belonging to Manchester, 
Salford and Droylsden ; and had made some effort to secure 
the College buildings as a home for them. The foundation 
took final shape in his last will, dated i6 December 1651. The 
number of boys was to be increased to forty, others being 
chosen from Crumpsall, Bolton and Turton. A sum of 
£j^ooo was to be laid out by his executors in lands of the 
yearly value of £^20 for their maintenance, education and 
apprenticeship or other preferment. A further sum of ;^500 
was appointed to purchase the College, if possible, or some 
other suitable home ; and in addition £100 to establish a 
library under the same roof, if that could be arranged, and 
;/^i,ooo to be spent upon books, besides £200 for books to be 
chained in the churches of Manchester and Bolton, and the 
chapels of Turton, Walmsley and Gorton. The books were 
to be selected by Mr. Johnson and two others named. Hos- 
pital and library were committed to the management of twenty- 
four feoffees, for whose guidance elaborate provisions were laid 
down. The lasting success of the foundation is the best testi- 
mony to the wisdom and care with which these had been 

Less than two years from that date Humphrey Chetham 
died at the age of seventy-three, and was buried in the Col- 
legiate Church. His friends gave him a sumptuous, nay an 
extravagant funeral, the cost of which amounted almost to 
;^i,2oo, an enormous sum having regard to the value of money 
2Lt that time. He had never married. Nephews inherited his 


lands ; the boys of the hospital are his children. Their num- 
bers have grown from the original 40 to 60, 80, 100. For 
their home, and for his books, the College was bought, as he 
wished. The feoffees found it a ruin, and restored it, as we 
may see this day. During two centuries that was his only 
monument. But he was not forgotten. In 1853, exactly 200 
years after his death, a marble effigy was placed by pious hands 
in the church where he had been laid. It was the gift of one 
of his boys ; and singularly enough the boy was a Pilkington. 

^ W. H. B. BIRD. 






Simon, lord of Montague, was governor of Corte Castle 
in 12985 and served in the Welsh, French and Scottish wars. 
He was of Shipton Montague in Somerset, and died about 
13 1 6, his son William being summoned to Parliament in 13 17. 
He was ancestor of the Earls of Salisbury. 

Seal. A shield of arms — a /esse indented of three fusils — between two grotesque 
heads with spread arms. Above the shield is a castle between two ragged 
stumps of trees, each with a bird perched on it. S' * SIMON IS • 

CouNTERSEAL. An oblong field with a rampant griffon. This is the griffon 
of gold on a blue field which Simon bore on his banner at Carlaverock. 
In the roll of arms called the Parliamentary Roll he bears both coats 
quartered in a very early example of a quartered shield — quartile de 
argent e de azure en les quarters de azure les griffons de or en les quarters de 
argent les daunces de goules — the indented fesse being mistaken for a 


John, lord of Suley or Sudeley in Gloucestershire, was 
aged twenty-two years when he succeeded Bartholomew his 
father in 1274, and was Chamberlain of the household to 
Edward L He died a very old man in 10 Edw. IIL 
Seal. A shield of Mm^—tzuo bends. S' lOHANNIS • DE • SVLEYE. 


John de Moels, lord of North Cadbury in Somerset, 
was aged twenty-six when he succeeded his father in 1294, 
and was summoned as a baron from 27 Edw. I. He died 
about 1309. 

Seal. A shield of arms — tzuo bars with three roundels in the chief S' lOHIS * 
DE • MOLIS — between two wingless wyverns. 



Edmund, baron of Stafford, son and heir of Nicholas 
of Stafford, had livery of his father's lands in 1294. He had 
great estates in the county from which he took his name, and 
was in the Gascon and Scottish wars. He died in 2 Edw. II. 
and was ancestor of the Stafford Dukes of Buckingham. 
Seal, A shield of arms — a cheveron — between two little stars ^ (or molets). 


John Lovel, lord of Docking in Norfolk, was son and 
heir of John Lovel of Minster Lovel in Oxfordshire, whom 
he succeeded in 1286, being then aged thirty-two years. He 
was summoned to Parliament as Lord Lovel of Tichmarsh in 
Northamptonshire, his mother being apparently the heir of 
the Tichmarsh lands. He died in 4 Edw. II., ancestor of the 
line of Lovels which ended with the Lord Lovel who fought 
for King Richard at Bosworth, and for Lambert Simnel at 
Stoke, after which day he was never seen again. 
Seal. A shield of ^xm%—wavy with a label SIGILL' • lOHANNIS • LOVEL. 


Edmund of Hastings, lord of ' Enchimeholmok,' 
which is Inchmahome or Inchmacolmoc in Menteith, was 
younger brother of John, Lord Hastings, another sealer of 
this letter. His wife was Isabel, the widow of William 
Comyn of Kirkintilloch, and daughter and heir of Isabel, 
Countess of Menteith in her own right, by Walter Comyn 
of Badenoch. Inchmahome, the chief lordship of the 
earldom, was given by Edward I. to Edmund of Hastings 
about 1296. He was at Carlaverock in 1300, and died with- 
out issue about 13 14, being probably one of those barons 
killed at Bannockburn. 

Seal. A shield of arms — wavy — between two branches of leaves and flowers. 
The inscription, nearly all broken away, is said to have been S' ED- 
without doubt those of the ancient earls of Menteith. A wavy coat was 
borne by the Drummonds, vassals of Menteith. 

^ The B. M. Catalogue of Seals calls them crosslets, but wrongly. 




Ralph fitz William, lord of Grimthorpe, co. York, 
was second son of William fitz Ralph of Grimthorpe, by Joan, 
daughter of Thomas of Greystock of Cumberland. He suc- 
ceeded his elder brother Geoffrey fitz William in 24 Edw. I. 
and in 34 Edw. I. he succeeded to the lands of his cousin 
John of Greystock, another sealer of this letter, under a 
settlement made by the said John. He was a warden and 
joint-warden of the Scots marches and governor of Berwick 
and governor of Carlisle. He died in 1 3 1 5, being the founder 
of the second family of the name of Greystock. 

Seal. A shield of arms — bureliy ^ with three garlands — between two wyverns. 
Above the shield is a helm with the fan crest. S' RADVLFI • FIL' • 


Robert de Scales, lord of Newsells in Barkway, co. 
Herts, was grandson of Alice, the heir of Rocester of New- 
sells. He succeeded his father, another Robert, about 1267, 
being then the king's ward, and died in 1305. 
Seal. A shield of arms — six escallops — between two swords. 


William Touchet, lord of Levenhales, was summoned 
to Parliament as a baron by writs from 1299 1306, but 
little is known of him. When summoned in March, 1297, 
to go with horses and arms to York he is described as of 
the county of Northampton. 

Seal. A shield of arms — a lion in a field sown with crosslets formy fitchy. 
IE • SV • SEL • DE ■ AMVR • LEL. 


[John Abadam or Ap Adam, lord of Beverstone in 
Gloucestershire, had lands in his own right in Twenham in 
the Welsh marches and married Elizabeth, daughter and heir 
of John Gurney of Beverstone, with whom he had the lord- 
ship of Beverstone in Gloucestershire and other lordships in 
Somerset. He was summoned to the crowning of Edward II. 
in 1308 and died in 13 10. His name appears in the body of 
this letter, but his seal is not attached.] 

^ The field of the shield is divided by small bars between wider spaces of 
the field, resembling gimel bars. If these small bars represent the dividing 
lines between the colours, the shield is barry of eight pieces. 




John of Havering, lord of Grafton in Wiltshire, 
which manor he bought of [Geoffrey] de Nevill, was Constable 
of the Devizes, Seneschal of Gascony, and Justice of South 

Seal. A shield of arms— ^ Iton with a forked tail. SIGILLVM • lOHANNIS • 


Robert de la Warde, lord of Whitehall [Alba Aula], 
was steward of the king's household, and died in 1307. The 
shield of vair, borne upon his seal, was carried by his daughter 
Joan to the family of her husband, the Meynells of Langley 
Meynell in Derbyshire. 

Seal. A shield of arms — vair — with a helm above it with a fan crest. S' 


Nicholas of Segrave, lord of Stowe, and of Barton 
Segrave, co. Northants, was second son of Nicholas of Segrave, 
lord of Segrave in Leicestershire, a leader of the rebel barons 
at Lewes. He was born about 1260 and fought at Falkirk, 
and at the crowning of Edward IL was made marshal of 
England. He died in 1322 leaving an only daughter, who 
died without issue. 

Seal. A shield of arms — a chief and over all a lion with a forked tail)- BON • 
IVR • EIT • KE • SE • SEL • DEIT. 


Walter de Teye, lord of Stangreve in Yorkshire, 
was husband of Isabel, daughter [and heir T\ of John of 
Stangreve, by Ida, daughter and coheir of John de Beauchamp 
of Bedford. He died in 1324 s.p. He was at the battle of 
Falkirk, where he bore the arms shown upon this seal. 

^ The impression of this seal is not strong, but I am unable to read into 
it the well known arms of this Nicholas, which, as the Boroughbridge roll de- 
scribes them, were de sable un lyoun dargent coronee dor ove label de gules. The 
lion on the seal does not appear to be crowned. The British Museum cata- 
logue of seals describes it, after its wonted fashion, carelessly and wrongly. * A 
lion rampant, debruised by a barrulet ' is an impossible blazon for a medieval 
shield, and the fact that the lion's tail is forked has not been thought worthy 
of note by the compiler. I am of opinion that Nicholas Segrave used for 
this occasion a seal of the arms of Hastang, which is without doubt the 
counterseal of Robert Hastang's large seal (No. xcvii.) 


Seal. A shield of arms — a Jesse between two cheverons with three pierced molets 
on the fesse. The inscription is broken away. 

CouNTERSEAL. A shield of the like arms. SIGILL' • WALTERI • DE • 


[John de Lisle, lord of Wodeton or Watton in the 
Isle of Wight, was governor of Carisbrooke Castle in 1267, 
and died about 1303-4. His name appears in the letter but 
his seal is not appended.] 


Eustace of Hache, lord of Hache in Wiltshire, is 
said to have been a menial servant of Edward 1. He was 
governor of Portsmouth 22 Edw. I., and died 34 Edw. L 
without male issue. 

Seal. A shield of arms— ^ cross engrailed. SIGILLVM • EVSTAGHII • 

Counterseal. a shield of the like arms. S' EVSTAGHII • DE • HAGHE. 


Gilbert Peche, lord of Corby, succeeded his father 
Sir Gilbert Peche of Brunne, co. Cambridge, in his Cam- 
bridgeshire and Suffolk lands, his two elder brothers having 
been disinherited. In 13 14 he was one of the prisoners after 
Bannockburn, and he died in 1322. 

Seal. A shield of arms — a fesse between two cheverons — hung between two 
wingless wyverns. SIGILL[VM] • GILBERTI • PECHE. 

Counterseal. The shield and wyverns. S' GILBERTI • PECHE. 


William Paynel, lord of ' Fracynton,' served in the 
Scottish wars and died in 13 17 s.p., seised of divers manors 
in Wiltshire and Sussex, amongst which no manor of the 
name of Fracington or Fracynton is found. His first wife 
was Margaret of Gatesden, formerly wife of John de Camoys, 
which lady was assigned to him by deed in the said John's 
lifetime ! 

Seal. A lozenge shaped seal of arms — two bars and an orle of martlets — be- 
tween four wingless wyverns. SIGILLVM • WILLELMI • PAYNEL. 

Counterseal. An antique gem with a naked figure holding a thyrsus or 
branch in one hand and a sword (?) in the other. • * ' EL • AMI " 



Bevis de Knovill, lord of Blanchminster or Oswes- 
try in Shropshire, was sheriff of Shropshire and Staffordshire 
1275-8, and governor of a castle on the Welsh marches. He 
married before 24 Edw. I. a certain Eleanor, probably his 
second wife, by whom he had the moiety of Blanchminster. 
He died in 1306, leaving another Bevis as his son and heir. 

Seal. A shield of arms — three pierced molets with a label S' BOGONIS • DE • 


FuLK LE Strange, lord of Corsham, was second son of 
Robert le Strange of Whitchurch by Eleanor, sister and co- 
heir of William of Whitchurch. He was born about 1267 
and succeeded his elder brother John in 1289 at the age of 
twenty-two. He followed Thomas, Earl of Lancaster, and 
had a pardon therefor in 12 Edw. II. He was seneschal of 
Aquitaine in 1332 and married a daughter and coheir of 
Giffard of Brimsfield. He died in 1324 and was founder of 
the line of the Lords Strange of Blackmere. 

Seal. A shield of arms— lions passant. S' FVLCHONIS • LE • ES- 


Henry de Pinkeny, lord of Weedon in Northampton- 
shire, was younger son of another Henry de Pinkeny and was 
heir of his elder brother Robert in 1295, at which time he 
was aged thirty. He died in 1301 without issue. 

Seal. The knight upon a galloping horse — the shield and trappers have the 
arms — a /esse indented. Horse and rider have the fan crest. S' HENRIC ' ■ . 


John of Hudleston, lord of Aneys in Milium in 
Cumberland, was son and heir of John of Hudleston by Joan, 
the daughter and heir of Adam de Boyvile of Milium. He 
died before 15 Edw. II. 

A shield of 2.xms—afret, S' lOH'IS • DE • HODLESTON. 




Roger of Huntingfeld, lord of Bradenham in Norfolk 
and of Huntingfeld in Suffolk, was son and heir of William 
of Huntingfeld, one of the rebel barons in arms at Evesham, 
who was grandson of William of Huntingfeld one of the 
twenty-five Magna Carta barons. He died in 1301. 

Seal. A shield of arms — a /esse ^ with three roundels thereon — between two 
wingless wyverns. S' ROGERI • DE • HVNTINGFELD. 


Hugh fitz Henry, lord of Ravensworth in Richmond- 
shire, died at Berwick-on-Tweed in March, 130^, and was 
ancestor of the house of the Lords fitz Hugh. 

Seal. A shield of arms— /r^//)i with a chief. S' • H' • FIL' • HENRICI. 


John le Breton, lord of Sporle in Norfolk, was of a 
family which had Sporle Manor by grant of Henry de Veer, 
husband of a daughter of Baldwin de Bois, who had it of Henry 
I. He was a justice of trialbaston in Norfolk and Suffolk in 
33 Edw. I. and died in 13 10. 

Seal. A shield of arms — quarterly with a border. A • TVZ • SALVZ. 


Nicholas de Carew, lord of Mulesford, was descended 
from William de Carew, who had a confirmation of the manor 
of Moulesford in 14 John. He died about 5 Edw. II. 

Seal. A shield of ^xm^— three lions passant. S' NICHOLAI • DE • CARREU. 


Thomas, lord of La Roche, of whom little is known 
with accuracy, was summoned as a baron to Parliament from 
1299 to 1306. He is supposed to have been the Thomas 
summoned to follow the king to the Scottish wars in 11 
Edw. II. 

Seal. A shield of arms — three roach swimming — upon a shield shaped seal. 

1 The British Museum catalogue of seals interprets certain scratches beside 
the fesse as * two cotises * ! 



Walter de Moncy, lord of Thornton by Skipton, co. 
York, was at the •siege of Carlaverock, where his banner was 
checkered silver and gules. He died about 1308. 

Seal. A shield of arms — checkered — with a helm above it. Above the helm 
and accommodated to it in the fashion of a crest is a beast of uncertain 
character with sharp nose and pointed ears — a fox, if what seems like a 
fox's brush be aught more than a thickening of the inner line surround- 
ing the inscription. It is more probably that a beast with a short tail 
like a terrier's stump is indicated. S' WALTERI • DE : MOUNCI. 


John fitz Marmaduke, lord of Horden in Easington, 
CO. Durham, was son of Marmaduke fitz Geoffrey, of a house 
founded by Richard, nephew of Ralph Flambard the bishop. 
He was before Carlaverock with his tattered banner of red 
with the fesse and the three popinjays of white. He died as 
governor of Perth for King Edward. As he willed to be 
buried by Durham Cathedral his servants incurred the censure 
of the canon law by cutting up his body and boiling the 
flesh from the bones in order that they might conveniently 
carry his relics through the enemy's land. His only son, 
Richard fitz John, alias fitz Marmaduke, steward to Lewis, 
Bishop of Durham, was murdered on the old bridge at Durham 
in 13 1 8 by his kinsman Robert Nevill, and the Lumleys, 
descendants of his sister Mary, were his heirs in Ravensworth 
and Stranton. 

Seal. A shield of arms — a fesse between three popinjays. CREDE • MICHI. 


John, lord of Kingeston, was constable for King Edward 
of the castle of Edinburgh and sheriff of the county in 1298, 
when he had a grant of castle and county during the king's 
pleasure. In 1305 he was one of the guardians of the king- 
dom of Scotland until the coming of John of Brittany. His 
arms de sable a un lion rampaund de or od la couwe fourchie are 
found in the roll of arms called the Parliamentary Roll amongst 
those of the barons and bannerets, and Sir Nicholas and Sir 
Walter of Kingeston bear these arms with certain differences 
amongst the Yorkshire knights in the same roll. 

Seal. A shield of arms — a lion with a forked tail — between two wyverns 
[one remaining]. SIGILLVM • lOHANN • • • • ON. 

CcuNTERSEAL. A shicld and the like arms. 




Robert Hastang, lord of La Desiree, was of Leaming- 
ton Hastang in Warwickshire, son and heir of Robert Hastang 
of Leamington by Joan, daughter and coheir of William de 
Curli. He was summoned as a baron to Parliament in 1 3 1 1 . 

Seal. A shield of arms — a chief and a lion with a forked tail over all — between 


Ralph, lord of Grendon in Warwickshire and of Shen- 
ston in Staffordshire, was summoned as a baron from 1299 to 
1303. Soon after this last summons he seems to have died, 
his son Robert succeeding him, but the date of his death is 

Seal. A shield of arms — two cheverons. S' RAD'I • DE • GRENDONE. 


William, lord of Leyborne in Kent, succeeded his 
father in 1271 and was constable of Pevensey Castle 1294 and 
admiral of the fleet. A writ for taking an inquest after his 
death was issued 12 March 13-^^. 

Seal. A shield of arms — six lioncels — hung between two wingless wyverns. 


John of Greystock, lord of Morpeth in Northumber- 
land, was baron of Greystock in Cumberland, being son and 
heir of William of Greystock by Mary, daughter and coheir 
of Roger de Merlay of Morpeth. He was twenty-five years 
old when he succeeded his father in 1 7 Edw. I. and died with- 
out issue in 34 Edw. 1. 

Seal. A shield of arms — three lozenge-shaped pillows — between two wingless 


Matthew fitzJohn, lord of Stokenham, in Devonshire, 
was governor of Exeter in 1288, sheriff of Devonshire in 
1288 and 1294 and warden of Melksham and Chippenham 
forests in 1301. He died in 3 Edw. II. s.p., leaving his lands 
to the king. 

Seal.'^A shield of arms — three lions in a partycoloured ^eld — upon a shield 
shaped seal. S' MATHEI • FlU • lOHANNIS. 



Nicholas de Meynill, Lord ofWhorlton in Yorkshire, 
was son and heir of another Nicholas whom he succeeded in 
27 Edw. I. He died in 1322, leaving a bastard son William, 
who, like his father, was summoned as a baron. 

Seal. — A shield of arms half defaced— /^r^^ ^mel bars and a chief- — . . , 
. . . NICHOLAI • DE • MEY • • • 


John Paynel, Lord of Otley in Yorkshire, is presumably 
the same as John Paynel of Drax in Yorkshire, who was 
summoned as a baron from 1299 to 13 18, and is believed to 
have died before 1326. 

Seal. A shield of arms — tzvo bars and an orle oj martlets. S' lOH'IS * PAY- 






Richmond, June 1703. 

OUR family came from the Cadois,^ and the name was 
there Du Puy, when removed into the Netherlands, it 
was changed to De Put, which is the same in Dutch. The 
Van was added afterwards by the K. of Spain. 

Your great great Grandfather, that is your Grandfather's 
Grandfather, was an eminent merchant at Antwerp, Henry 
Vandeput. He had two wives, first Elizabeth Husbard, by 
whom he had several children, whose Posterity remain in the 
Netherlands. The second wife was Mary Naurgheer, by 
whom he had several sons, John was the eldest, Giles the 
youngest, which was your great Grandfather. He came over 
here into England, upon the terrible persecution of the Duke 
dAlva, after some time went over again to Antwerp, to see 
his relations, (& I think it was at Ipres) He married Sarah, 
the daughter of John Jaupin, who came from Cologn, died, 
& left her very young to undergo many troubles. She was 
Heiress to a noble Family in Germany, but because she was a 
Protestant disinherited. But had the value of 10,000 sterl. 
for her portion. Your great Grandfather brought her over 
here, where she was a great Example of Humility, Piety & 
Charity, and a constant Communicant in the Church of Eng- 
land. She lived to a great age, but I can barely remember 
her. Her Coat of Arms was 3 Jaupins or pine apples, wh. wee 
Quarter. Your Grandfather Peter Vandeput married Jane 
the Daughter of Dierick Hoste, a great merchant, who came 
to live here upon the same persecution, I think from Zeland : 
your great Grandmother was a Demetrius, and her Mother was 
a Le Grand, All Refugees. 

1 This curious document was found amongst the papers of the family of 
Bosanquet of Dingestow, descendants of the family of Vandeput, and is con- 
tributed by Mr. N. E. T. Bosanquet. 

2 The handwriting leaves it uncertain whether this word be *Cadois' or 
* Vadois.' 


And thus you may see how it has pleased God to bless 
this family on both sides, who have continued stedfast in the 
true primitive Faith, protesting only against the Innovations of 
the Church of Rome, which were both against Scripture and 

Of the same Family there was a S"^ Charles Vandeput, 
who was Collon^ of a Regiment of Horse, & Knighted by the 
Emperor for his good service in a famous battle against the 

Henry Vandeput, when the French endeavoured to sur- 
prise Antwerp. They got into the city by Treachery, and put 
abundance to the Sword, so that it was called the French fury. 
He commanded part of the Militia, and was very serviceable 
in driving them out of the City to conclude will only tell 
you what your good Grandfather told me, viz. : — 

Sed Genus et Proavos et quae non fecimus ipsi 
Vix ea nostra voco, ^c. 




THIS carving of the patron of England and of knights 
enriches an upright seat-end once in an English church 
and now in the collection of our contributor, Mr. Walter Rye, 
who discovered it in Norfolk. The saint, upright in the 
stirrups upon a rearing horse, is hewing deliberately at the 
dragon with a great single-handed sword, and the dragon is 
huger and fiercer than is the worm-like thing over which St. 
George is wont to triumph. His helm seems to be a sallet 
with a visor pushed up, and possibly with a chin-piece or buff. 
The breastplate is shown in two pieces ; the tonlets or tassets 
have small hanging tuilles at the side, and the knee-cops are 
framed with elaborate overlapping plates. The steed is held 
easily in hand by the bridle of a bit with long and powerful 

The date of this very curious and interesting carving is 
probably about 1480. 

St. George and the Dragon. 

Fro?n an oak caiviiij^: 



THE question whether a title to armorial bearings can 
be claimed by prescription has of late been the subject 
of much controversy. It was started by a series of articles 
in the Saturday Review by a person calling himself ' X ' 
(which were reprinted under the title of ne Right to Bear Arms)^ 
and was continued on very similar lines by Mr. A. C. Fox- 
Davies in his work on Armorial Families. Mr. W. P. W. 
Phillimore has lately joined forces with * X ' and Mr. Fox- 
Davies in a pamphlet entitled. Heralds College and Coats of Arms 
regarded from a Legal Aspect, 

These writers deny that any prescriptive right to bear 
arms now exists in England, while admitting (at least ' X ' does; 
Mr. Phillimore seems doubtful) that it did exist up to the com- 
mencement of the heralds' visitations. This view is supported 
by little sound argument and less authority. In place of these 
we find the question begged by the plentiful use of expres- 
sions such as ' bogus,' ^ sham,' * illegal,' and so on ad nauseam^ 
as though the constant iteration of these epithets, if shouted 
loud enough and long enough, would eventually prove the 
case. It is the more sad to see Mr. Phillimore in this galley 
because the public is indebted to him for much useful genea- 
logical work, and for his amusing exposure of certain recent 
pedigree frauds. 

* X,' it is true, quotes a considerable number of documents, 
but the bulk of these, though many are of great interest, have 
no bearing on the point he is trying to prove. His whole case 
is admitted to rest upon one document, namely the writ of 
Henry V. to certain sherijfFs in 1418.^ It is apparently this 
document that ' X ' has in his mind when he says that ' all 
arms shown to have been in use prior to the battle of Agin- 
court were accepted as then existing by right without ques- 

The document will not, in my opinion, warrant the con- 

1 The Right to Bear Arms, ed. 2, p. 44. 

2 Ibid. p. 98. 



struction thus put upon it. The order of 141 8 was a purely- 
military one, and it was limited in its scope to the occasion 
on which it was issued. This is, I think, clearly shown by 
the language. It is addressed to the sheriffs, not to the 
heralds ; it relates to 'our present voyage just about to be 
made ' ; and the penalties are even more striking ; the offender 
is not to be allowed to set out on the voyage ; he is to for- 
feit all wages already received ' for the same,' and all newly- 
assumed arms are to be defaced aftbe time of the musters. Clearly 
such language could not be used with any intention of 
creating a continuing or permanent authority.^ 

' X,' then, admits that the heralds, during the early visita- 
tion period,^ did recognize arms ' upon the strength of usage 
for a certain period,' though he is unable to state what ' this 
needful period of usage ' was.^ But when he states that in 
such cases the arms were * recorded and confirmed with little 
or no alteration,' he is not stating the facts fairly. Hundreds 
of coats were ' recorded ' at the visitations, without alteration 
and without ' confirmation,' simply on the strength of user, 
and by far the greater part of these are shown, by the length 
of the pedigrees recorded with them, to have no proved 
claim to date from before Agincourt. We may acquit ' X ' 
of any deliberate attempt to mislead, his acquaintance with 
ancient armorial documents being doubtless a limited one, but 
his language is none the less misleading. 

Moreover, as all arms were ' bogus ' until recorded, it 
follows that the bulk of the armorial seals, brasses, and what- 
not, prior to 1528 at the earliest, were 'illegal ' ! How arms 
could be at once ' bogus ' and ' borne by right ' is not easy of 
comprehension ; but so it is according to 'X.* 

The Right to Bear Arms ultimately boils down to this pro- 
position ; ' By the use of a certain coat of arms you assert your des- 
cent from the person to whom those arms were granted^ confirmed 
or allowed. That is the beginning and end of armory.' * 

1 will deal with this statement hereafter ; meanwhile let us 
turn to Mr. Phillimore. 

^ The construction of this document has already been dealt with in the 
Ancestor by Sir George Sitwell (i. 82). 

2 The earliest known commission for a visitation is that to Benolte in 
1528-9 ; the latest is dated 1 3 May, 1686 (Noble, College of ArmSy app. xxi.) 

' Ibid. pp. 98, 99. 

* Ibid. p. 18. The italics are the author's. 


His pamphlet is a distinct advance on the previous works. 

infer these from the general tenor of the whole work, and 
from statements which are put rather in the form of argument 
than axiom. Two quotations will, I think, make this clear. 

No more serious harm than the general ridicule of his friends and neigh- 
bours would befall a man who advertised in the Times that he was Duke of 
London and Marquess of Fleet Street. . . . The voluntary assumption of a 
coat-of-arms obviously stands on the same footing ; and just as no length of 
prescription gives right to the title of Duke of London, so no prescription can 
avail in the case of arms, and long continued usage through many generations 
is of no value in England when their validity comes to be prosaically ex- 
amined, either by the College of Arms, or by the ordinary courts of law, for 
such purposes as the assumption of name and arms, or the creation of a baro- 
net. We must remember that an individual cannot create for himself an estate 
of inheritance in the bogus arms he or his ancestors have assumed.^ 

The advocates of legality in the use of arms generally state that only those 
coats are regular and genuine which are on record at Heralds' College. 
Broadly speaking this is the case,2 and no amount of prattle about arms borne 
by tradition or prescription can alter that simple position.^ 

If these passages only were taken, we might be justified in 
assuming that Mr. Phillimore believed in the inspiration of 
the gospel according to 'X.' 

But we find Mr. Phillimore expressing himself much more 
guardedly towards the end of his pamphlet : — 

We must recognize that unless heraldry is to become mere chaos, armorial 
bearings must be borne according to rule, and that no rule is so convenient as 
that which recognizes that lawful arms are those which rests on grants from 
the sovereign through his authorized officers. In a word, let all arms, whether 
ancient or modern, be confined to those whom old records and the long prac- 
tice of centuries show to be properly entitled thereto.* 

With the last sentence I entirely agree, and it is solely 
from a study of ' old records and the long practice of cen- 
turies ' that I have come to conclusions the very opposite of 

1 p. 8. All quotations are from the second edition. 

2 I am quite at a loss to understand the qualification implied here by the 
words * broadly speaking.' 

3 p. i6. 

* Page 23. The italics are mine. 



Mr. Phillimore's. The question then resolves itself into 
this : If the College ^ in early times admitted that arms could 
be borne by prescription, when and by what authority was the 
practice changed ? 

Let us try to realize what must have taken place when the 
heralds first began to make Visitations. The official records 
must have been very scanty, even if all books or rolls of 
arms of an earlier date were admitted as binding. It has 
never been suggested, so far as I am aware, that those who 
used coat armour in the thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth 
centuries (when armory was of practical use and interest, 
and had not become merely academic) did so by virtue of 
grants of arms ; and the herald who had the temerity to de- 
nounce such arms as ' sham ' or ' bogus,' where no grant could 
be produced, would, methinks, have had somewhat short 
shrift. But though we have no detailed account of what 
actually took place at a Visitation, Cooke, Clarenceux, has left 
a very graphic account of an analogous transaction in 1583 
(see post). 

Sir Walter Mildmay's son produced to Clarenceux and some 
other heralds a number of charters and other evidences suffi- 
cient to prove their descent from a certain Hugh de Mildmay. 
Two of these charters have the armorial seals of two Mildmays, 
one undated, but about the time of Henry III., the other 
dated in the reign of Edward III. Upon this evidence the 
pedigree is registered and the arms are ' ratified and con- 

Some such procedure, it seems to me, must have been 
adopted at the Visitations. A man was summoned to prove 
his pedigree by documentary or other sufficient evidence. He 
proved his arms in exactly the same way. The very phrase 
used when the evidence was not considered satisfactory, non 
probavit arma^ shows that there was some recognized way in 
which proof could be made. 

Let us see how a Visitation summons ran. 

A warrant to the Chief Bailiff of the Wapentake of in the county of 

Yorke, to summon all Knights, Esquires, and Gentlemen within the Wapentake 
to appear before Norroy King of Arms or his Marshal, etc. 

1 I use this term for convenience. It seems clear that the College, as a 
corporation, has no heraldic authority whatever. None is conferred upon it 
by its charter. Grants of arms from the earliest times were, and still are, the 
acts of the Kings of Arms. 



These are to require you, and in the Queen's Majesty's name to charge and 
command you that . . . you warn all knights, esquires and gentlemen whose 
names are hereunder written . . . personally to appear before me . . . and 
that they bring with them such arms and crests as they now use and bear, 
with their pedigrees and descents, and such of their evidences or matters of 
credit as may (if need so require) justify the same, that I, knowing how they 
use and challenge the names of esquires or gentlemen and beare their arms, 
may make entrance of the same accordingly. . . . 

Moreover, I will all those that have received either arms, crests or pedigrees 
from one William Dakins (the late lewd usurper of the office of Norroy King 
of Arms) bring them in to be cancelled, if they be untrue, and, being found 
justifiable, to receive the same at my hands, with warranty, etc.i 

This document is particularly instructive. The knights, 
esquires and gentlemen were to ' bring with them such arms 
and crests as they now use and bear . . . and such of their 
evidences ... as may . . . justify the same.' The last para- 
graph is very interesting ; even the acts of a ' lewd usurper ' 
might be 'justifiable.' 

The evidence which follows proves conclusively, it seems to 
me, that the heralds constantly and systematically recorded a 
proved user of arms, at least as late as Dugdale's time ; that 
this was done by all the earlier heralds ; and that Dugdale's 
letter, ridiculed though it be by Mr. Phillimore, merely states 
what was then and always had been the everyday practice of 
the College. 

1 therefore join issue with Mr. Phillimore and the others of 
his school. ' Long continued usage through many generations ' 
has been recognized by English Heralds, from the earliest 
times of which we have an any record until a comparatively 
recent date, and ' old records and the long practice of centuries ' 
amply prove this statement. This is admittedly the old prac- 
tice of the English Heralds, and it is founded on common 
sense ; it is strictly analogous to the rules of common law ; 
and it is still followed by the Irish and, I believe, the Scotch 
Heralds. The Irish practice is shown by the following exem- 
plification, dated 1875. 

Sir John Bernard Burke certifies and declares that certain 
arms, ' which have been proved to me to have been long borne 
by prescription, are confirmed, and do of right belong and ap- 
pertain unto ' the persons therein mentioned.^ 

How comes it then that the Irish practice differs from the 

1 Glover's Visitation of Yorkshire, edited by Joseph Foster, p. 406. 

2 Misc. Gen. et Her. (new ser.), ii. 372. 


English ? The laws of heraldry in Ireland can hardly have 
been setded at a period anterior to the English dominion. 
Was Ireland specially exempted when the right to regulate 
arms was (as ' X ' says) 'appropriated or annexed to the Crown ' ? ^ 
Have the Irish Heralds become lax and invented a practice of 
their own ? Mr. Phillimore and ' X * are alike silent on the 

Let me once more quote* 'the beginning and end of 
armory ' according to ' X ' : 'By the use of a certain coat of 
arms, you assert your descent from the person to whom those 
arms were granted, confirmed or allowed.' ^ 

Mr. Phillimore's version of this runs : ' the ultimate and 
only test is whether the arms rest on a grant or ancient allow- 
ance of the Heralds at some Visitation.' ^ 

It will be observed that Mr. Phillimore's statement will bear 
a much wider interpretation than the other. In the case of a 
grant there is no room for doubt ; the descent of the coat is 
limited by the words of the grant. But an ' allowance ' is 
open to two interpretations ; ' X ' clearly takes the narrower 
view ; Mr. Phillimore is not so confident, and his language is 
consistent with his holding a wider view. ' X ' speaks of ' tbe 
person to whom those arms were . . . allowed.' Clearly, in 
his view, the arms are allowed only to the individual entering 
the pedigree and his descendants. Thus, if John Doe enters 
his pedigree of six generations at a Visitation, and arms are 
allowed by the visiting herald, the law according to ' X ' would 
state that only the descendants of John Doe himself are entitled 
to the arms then recorded.* If this be so, perhaps ' X ' will 
kindly explain how an ' allowance ' differs from a grant. It is 
quite certain that persons to whom arms were ' allowed ' at the 
Visitations were not required to obtain grants, and did not do so.® 
The heralds, then, obviously recognized a difference, which 
apparently ' X ' does not. In short, the herald recorded a 
proved user of arms, just as he recorded a proved pedigree. 

Mr. Phillimore would get over this difficulty by a suggestion 

1 T^e Right to Bear Arms, p. 36. 
a Ibid. ed. 2, p. 18. 
•» Page 6. 

* This is the only grammatical construction that the passage will bear, and 
the reader is bound to assume that it is intentional. 

« Grants of arms are frequently noted in Visitations where the arms were 
claimed in virtue of a grant. 


that does more credit to his ingenuity than his knowledge of 
the subject. Speaking of Dugdale's letter/ he says, ' Pro- 
bably ... he by a goodnatured laxity set up inferentially, in 
support of the prescription claimed, a " lost grant," a favourite 
legal fiction.' ^ 

It is decidedly ingenious, and doubtless the fifteenth, six- 
teenth and seventeenth century heralds would have been most 
grateful to Mr. Phillimore had he lived early enough to pre- 
sent them with such a device. The then equivalents of Sir 
Gorgius Midas and Sir Pompey Bedell (not to mention other 
names) would have hailed the ' lost grant ' with great delight. 
The ' bogus ' pedigrees of the day would each, no doubt, have 
had its ^ lost grant ' ; not merely Agincourt, but Poitiers, Cre9y, 
Caerlaverock, Evesham, Acre, Hastings itself would have 
played prominent parts in the game. Unfortunately, it never 
seems to have occurred to anybody until Mr. Phillimore had to 
explain away a very plain statement by a very great herald. 
Quite a considerable number of ' fictions,' do appear in grants 
of arms, but that of the ' lost grant ' is not one of them. 

Mr. Phillimore's proposed remedy is an extraordinary one : 

Probably the greatest deterrent to the use of bogus arms would be the pub- 
lication of a list of all known grants of arms, with an intimation that only those 
were entitled to use them who either were themselves grantees or who could 
show descent from a grantee in accordance with the limitations of the respec- 
tive patents. 3 

The result would be surprising. We should look in vain 
for the names of the feudal nobility, of the great military 
leaders of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries ; the bulk of 
the names of our old Visitation families would be conspicuous 
by their absence. In return we should get a wonderful list 
of new men of various centuries, and (if we include exempli- 
fications with differences in Mr. Phillimore's term ' grants,' 
but not otherwise) a considerable number of more or less 
authentic cadet houses. The list would have an interest all 
its own, but it would hardly represent English armoury at its 

When we come to study Mr. Phillimore's Legal Aspect we 
find that it is based upon three analogies, namely, titles, estates 

1 Lansdowne MS. 870, fol. 88 ; Ancestor , ii. 45. 

2 Page 18. 

» pp. i8, 19. 



of inheritance, and trade-marks, each of which is absolutely 
against Mr. Phillimore's contentions. 

Apart from peerages, titles of honour borne by prescription 
were well known in early times, and are still recognized and 
used. ' The Knight of Glin ' or * The Master of Ehbank,' 
the emphatic ' The ' of the heads of some Scotch clans, and 
all courtesy titles, may be cited as instances of those still 

Turn we now to estates of inheritance. If there is one 
branch of the law in which prescription is fully recognized and 
still of paramount importance it is that relating to real pro- 
perty. It can hardly be news to Mr. Phillimore that a mere 
squatter can to-day acquire a valid title to land by a mere 
twelve years' occupation, and that not only against the world 
at large but against the rightful owner. A property so ac- 
quired would become an estate of inheritance in the squatter, 
and would descend to his heirs. ' We must remember (says 
Mr. Phillimore^) that an individual cannot create for himself 
an estate of inheritance in the bogus arms he or his ancestors 
have assumed ' ; on his own argument therefore the analogy 
to the law of real property is untenable. 

The reference to trade-marks is particularly unhappy, for 
what analogies exist between them and coats of arms are 
wholly against Mr. Phillimore's contentions. Registration of 
trade-marks was first established by an Act of Parliament 
passed in 1875.^ So that the whole of the law on the subject 
is purely statutory. But that act and the subsequent acts on 
the subject provided for the rectification of the register by 
the removal of any mark which had been improperly regis- 
tered, and a large number of such cases turned solely on the 
question of user.^ 

One can but admire Mr. Phillimore's reckless courage in 
suggesting that the law of coat-armour should be assimilated 
to that of trade-marks, so far as to give a registered proprietor 
of arms the right to obtain an injunction in cases of infringe- 
ment. If this were done, and were made retrospective, and 
were coupled (as it would logically have to be) with a ' recti- 
fication of the register,' there can be little doubt that the 
officers of arms would have an exceedingly busy time in can- 

1 Page 8. 

^ 38 & 39 Vict. cap. 91. 

3 See for example Jackson & Co. v. Napper, 35 Ch. Div. 162. 



celling their own grants and allowances.^ I prefer not to men- 
tion any modern instances of these ^ infringements/ but will 
refer Mr. Phillimore to one in 1585,^ which will be found a 
few pages further on. 

In early times, moreover, the coat of arms could be assigned 
by its owner by deed or bequeathed by will, just as a trade- 
mark can. Mr. Phillimore seems to have forgotten this when 
he says ' unlike trade-marks, they are not assignable.' ^ 

Mr. Phillimore appeals to the law, but his ' legal aspect ' 
is vague and uncertain in the extreme. ' Certain it is (he says) 
that the regulation of such matters was very early taken to be 
a matter of honour, and therefore to be dealt with by the 
royal prerogative, as the well-known case of Scrope Gros- 
venor . . . amply proves.' * 

Here again we seem to get a milder version of ' X's ' 
more positive statements. ' Undoubtedly, in the infancy of 
the science, people choose and assumed their own arms . . . 
but in all countries this right was soon appropriated and 
annexed to the Crown.' ^ 

Unfortunately, both ' X ' and Mr. Phillimore omit to 
inform us when, how, and by whom this was done, and 
they can hardly expect that their statement can be accepted 
without the citation of any authority. 

It is clear that the early heralds knew nothing of any 
such appropriation and annexation. The Scrope and Gros- 
venor case, cited by Mr. Phillimore as ^ ample proof ' of his 
statement, does not mention the heralds at all, while the 
commissioners who held the second inquiry laid down rules 
of evidence which in my opinion precluded the calling of 
heralds as witnesses. 

When Sir Richard Scrope demanded to know how he was 
to prove his arms, the judges replied that it was to be ' par 
bones nobles et sufficiauntz proeves eiauntz notice des aun- 

1 This may be done in Scotland. Seton quotes a case where a grant 
made in 1744 was ordered to be * recalled and expunged in 1762, on the 
ground of infringement ; and the defendants, who had obtained the new 
grant, were condemned in costs ' {Law and Practice of Heraldry in\Scotland [1863], 
pp. 48, 49). 

2 The Horsley case. 

3 Some notes on this branch of the subject are reserved for a future article. 
* Page 4. 

5 The Right to Bear Arms, ed. 2, p. 36. 



cestreSj et par veilles chartres et autres proeves autentikes/ ^ 
At a subsequent stage the Constable ' comanda as parties de 
faire lour proeve par veu des munimentz, cronicles, sepultures, 
tesmoignes des abbes, priours, et autres gentz de Seint Eglise, 
et autres proeves honurables eiauntz notice de lour auncestres 
et auncestrie, et de sepultures, peyn tours, verures, vestementz, 
et autres evidences, et enoutre par tesmoignes de seignours, 
chivalers, et esquiers de honour, et gentiles hommes eiauntz 
conissaunz darmes, et par nuUe autre homme de communs ne 
dautre estat/^ I doubt if the heralds at that date would have 
been deemed as such to come within any of these classifica- 

The evidence of John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, as to 
what took place on the previous dispute between Scrope and 
Carminow, points in the same direction. He testifies that at 
the last expedition of Edward III. into France, a controversy 
arose concerning the said arms between the said Sir Richard 
Scrope and one called Carminow of Cornwall, which Carminow 
challenged those arms of Sir Richard. The Duke referred 
the dispute to six knights, who, upon true evidence, found the 
said Carminow to be descended of a lineage armed * azure a 
bend or,* since the time of King Arthur ; and that Scrope's 
ancestors had used the same arms since the time of William 
the Conqueror. So it was adjudged that both might bear the 
arms entire.^ 

The evidence by both parties related to user pure and 

Sir Walter Ursewick deposed that he had seen Sir Richard 
Scrope with the arms claimed on his coat armour, banner and 
penon, ' et que de droit luy appartiegnent dauncestrie lez ditz 
armes, dount memoire ne court, com il ad oie dire des plou- 
sours noblez et vaillantz seignurs, chivalers et esquiers, et 
come voys et fame laboure.* Most of the other witnesses 
use similar expressions. 

Sir John Sully, K.G., aged 105, and armed eighty years, 
said that in his time he had always heard that the said arms 
belonged to Sir Richard Scrope by descent, as public opinion 

1 Scrope and Grosvenor Controversy , i. 39. 

2 Ibid. p. 40. 

3 Ibid. ii. 165. Six knights, observe, not six heralds. Clearly the * appro- 
priation or annexation to the Crown ' had not taken place up to this point. 


had reputed all his time, and that Sir Richard and others of 
his lineage had peaceably enjoyed them from beyond the time 
of memory/ 

To return to the ' legal aspect ' after this slight digression. 
The best statement that Mr. Phillimore can make as to 
the law on the subject is as follows^ : — 

The absence of any definite code or set of rules in early times respecting 
armoury is a clear indication that the law on the subject is wholly analogous 
to the common law, i.e. it rests, not on statute, but on very ancient and long 
usage, continued down to the present time, without, so far as we know, any 
break or interruption whatever. . . . The practice and law of heraldry in 
England has therefore to be gathered from the various royal grants and war- 
rants and letters patent relative thereto, and from the practice and usages of 
the officers of arms, extending without intermission over a period of five or 
six hundred years.3 

With this statement I entirely agree, thought I differ from 
Mr. Phillimore as to what ' the practice and usages of the 
officers of arms ' have been. 

The law of arms, therefore, is based solely upon custom, 
as Mr. Phillimore himself admits. 

We thus arrive at the Gilbertian conclusion, that the claims 
of the College, as set forth by its self-appointed champions, 
are based upon that very prescription, which is so loudly de- 
nounced in other people. Prescription for the college is good 
and lawful ; for any one else it is intolerable and not to be 
borne. It is a magnificent paraphrase of Bishop Warburton's 
celebrated reply to Lord Sandwich : ' Orthodoxy is my doxy, 
heterodoxy is another man's doxy.' It is a heraldic variant of 
the old game, ' Heads I win, tails you lose.' 

But is it sound in law ? I think not. The judges, to 
whom Mr. Phillimore's pamphlet frequently appeals, would 
deal shortly and sharply with him if he argued, ' My claim 

1 Scrope and Grosvenor Controversy y ii. 242. 

2 I have not overlooked the point made by him as to a name and arms 
clause in a will or settlement and as to baronets, but each of these rests on a 
different footing, and the decisions of the courts do not apply to the general 
proposition. The common form of the name and arms clause provides that 
the royal licence must be obtained, and the licence in turn declares that the 
coat of arms must be registered at the College. The royal warrant under 
which baronets' pedigrees must be registered at the College was dated in 
December, 1782, and it applied only to baronetcies of subsequent creation 
{Her. and Gen. iv. 285). 

' PP- 4» 5- 


is based solely on prescription, and I deny that the other 
side has any right to plead prescription at all.' Would they, 
in such a case, strike out the defence as embarrassing.^ ' If 
not, then (as Mr. Phillimore puts it), cadit questio' The 
period of prescription, except when explicitly altered by statute, 
is no doubt the constantly-receding date of the first year of 
the reign of King Richard the First, but it is not necessary to 
go back to that year in order to prove a prescriptive tide, 
as Mr. Phillimore very well knows. A proved user of a cen- 
tury, in the absence of any seriously conflicting evidence, 
would be ample ; and a considerably less period would suffice 
to set up such a prima facie case as would throw the burden of 
proof on to the other side. 

In the case of a disputed custom, the decision would be 
based (omitting legal technicalities) solely upon the evidence 
brought forward by the disputants, and the one that would 
prove the earliest user would win. 


With the object of putting ' X ' and Mr. Phillimore to 
their proof, I have collected a considerable amount of evidence, 
showing, in my opinion, that the ' old records and long practice 
of centuries ' are wholly in favour of the prescriptive right to 
bear arms, and that Dugdale's celebrated letter contains not a 
mere ' isolated ohiter dictum of a seventeenth century Garter,' 
but a plain statement of the heraldic practice in use down to 
his time. 

The following excerpts are mostly taken from grants of 
arms or crests, confirmations, and so on, and are therefore 
statements by the heralds themselves. I have purposely 
omitted quoting the mere textbooks, though many of them 
contain passages to the like eflFect.^ 

1394. King Richard II. 

Rex omnibus, etc., salutem. Sciatis quod cum dilectus et fidelis consanguin- 
eus noster, Thomas Comes Mariscallus et Nottingham, hahet justum titulum 
hereiitarium ad portandum pro crista unum leopardum de auro cum 
uno labello albo, qui de jure esset crista filii nostri primogeniti, 

» An embarrassing defence means * bringing forward a defence which de- 
fendant is not entitled to make use of.* 

2 Some of the earlier heraldic writers have already been quoted by Sir 
George Sitwell {Ancestor, i. 77, et seq.) 


si quern procreassemus : Nos ea consideratione concessimus pro nobis et 
heredibus nostris eidem Thomas et heredibus suis, quod ipsi pro differentia 
in ea parte diferre possint et diferant unum leopardum, et in loco labelli 
unam coronam de argento, absque impedimento nostri vel heredum nos- trorum 
supra dictorum. In cujus rei, etc. Teste R. apud Westm', 12 Januarii, anno 
17 R. secundi.i 


Whereas I was requested by John Bangor, gentleman, ' to search out for the 
armes of the said John. Whereupon, I . . . have made due search herein, and 
found the right armes of the said John and his 'progenitors time out of mind hath 
borne . . . which armes I confirme unto the said John Bangor and to his heires 
of his body lawfully begotten, without any impeachment of any person, for 
evermore.' 2 

1470. Holme, Norroy 

Egregius vir venerandusque pater . . . Petrus Hellard, Prior Canonicorum 
de Bridlyngton in comitatu Ebor', instancius multociens michi supplicaverit de 
armis sue progeniei parentibus ab olim et antiquo jure pertinentibus, inquisicio- 
nem facere diligentem.3 

An English version of this grant runs thus : — 
1470. Holme, Norroy 

These intire armes of his family his ancesters and their successors doe beare, 
which armes of their family were for there ancesters by what they were due to 
them for ever neither can tongue expresse or the memory of man recollect.* 

1483.^ Hawkeslowe, Clarenceux. 4 Mar. 25 Edw. IV. 

A Gentleman named Robert Braybroke of the County of Norfolk ... is 
come to me . . . praying me that I . . . would search my books of arms for 
the arms of his ancestors, which he of right ought now to bear. ... I have 
found his arms which of right he ought to bear, that is to witt, . . . the which 
arms I . . . give, grant, approve, confirm and ratify to the said gentleman 
called Robert Braybroke.^ 

i486. Carlyle, Norroy 

There is a gentleman called Will. Crokey, otherwise called Will. Johnson, of 
the County of Yorke, who hath brought unto me . . . the pitigra of his pro- 
genitors, father and mother, for the w*^^ I have duely searched, according to 
mine Office, at his instance, jw^:^ armes as to him belongeth, and to him devised 
the same armes w^^^ lawfull difference.^ 

1 Harl. MS. 1178, f. 45. 

2 Misc. Gen. etUer. i. 54 ; Harl. MS. 1507, f. 10. 

3 Froc. Soc. Ant. ser. 2, xvi. 343. 

* Tonge's Visitation of Yorkshire^ Surtees Soc. 41, App. p. xxxviii. 
5 The date given in the MS. is 4 March, 25 Edw. IV. ; as that king did not 
reign twenty-five years, I have assumed that the twenty-third year is meant. 
8 Add. MS. 6297, f, 73. 7 Harl. MS. 1507, f, 4. 




1494. Holme, Clarenceux 

Wm. Green of the County of Essex, gent., whose ancestors were most in- 
habitt in Yorksheere, w^h gent, hath tenderly prayed and required me ... to 
make good and thoroughe search for the very armes of his -predecessors, at whose 
instance ... I have found that the right armes of the said William and his 
predecessors, be ; etc.i 

1522. Wryothesley, Garter 

Comme ainsi soit que William Coffyn de Haddon en la Conte de Derby, 
escuyer, soit descende de noble lignee et ausi longuement ait continue en noblesse, 
portant armes. 

1535. Hawley, Norroy 

Sir William West, knight, . . . being descended of an old ancyent house hear- 
inge armes, hath desired me ... to make due search . . . for his right armes, 
the which there I have found, that is to say : argent, a fesse betweene three 
liberds heads sable, langued gules . . . I . . . hath devised, ordayned and 
asigned to the said Sir William into his armes ... on every lepard head [a] 
sirklett gold, etc.3 

1536. Barker, Garter 

For as muche as Roberte See . . . hath contynued in vertu, and he and his 
auncestors contynued in nobylyty and beringe of armes, and he not wilUnge to 
prejudice noe manner of personne, hath instantly desired and required me . . . 
to make due searche throughe all my Registers for the very right armes of his said 
auncestours ... I have endevored my selfe so to do, . . . and have so found 
that the right armes of the said Robert See and his said auncestours and theire 
predecessors been and appere in maner and fourme folowinge . . . whiche 
armes . . . I . . . testify the same, and also ratify and confirme unto the said 
Robert See and his posterity. ... In witnes whereof I . . . have signed these 
present letters pattentes of confirmacion with myne owne hand. * 

1537. Barker, Garter 

Credably infourmed that Richard Gresseham ... is come and discendyd 
[of an] honest line and auncyent stocke, and he and his ancetors hath long con- 
tynowed in nobilite and beryng armes, that is to say, silver, a chiveron ermile 
[between] iij moletts sable percyd of the fylde.5 

1537. Hawley, Clarenceux 

John Greshame, Mersar of Londonn, . . . ys desendyd of a good howse 
undefamed beryng armes under the lawse, he nott wyllyng to doo nothing that 
shall be preudercall [? prejudicial] to no gentylman of name and of armes, ther 
for he hathe dysired and required me to over se them and sett them in do order 
and forme, and to devys and order for hym his helme, crest and mantell, w' sum 
token of honner to preference the said Armes.^ 

1 Harl. MS. 1507, f. 5b. 
3 Surtees Soc. 41, p. xxxix. 
» Ibid. ii. 312. 

2 Ibid. 1507, f. 6b. 

* Misc. Gen. et Her. new ser. iii. 298. 

6 Ibid. ii. 311. 


1 54 1. Hawley, Clarenceux 

Grant of a crest to * John Bolney of the parryshe of Bolney in the countye 
of Sussex, esquire, descendid of an olde an ancyent howse, undefamed of long 
tyme beryng armes.' i 

1543. Barker, Garter 

Robert Starkey of London, Mercer, ... is discended of honest lynage, and 
alsoe his ancesters and predecessors hath long continued in nobility and beareing 

1543. Hawley, Clarenceux 

John Wade ... is descended of an antient old house, undefamed of long 
tyme beareing armes ; neuerthelesse he being uncerteyne in what forme and 
manner his predecessors hath borne their creast — grant of a crest ; the arms are 
not mentioned.3 

1544-5. Hawley, Norroy 

These armes are acknowledged to be the auntientt armes of West of Aughton, 
com. Ebor.* 

1547. Dethick, Norroy 

Francis Armar ... is discended of an antient house beareing armes, both 
by the father side and the mother side neuertheless he being uncerteyne in 
what sort and manner his predecessors bare their tymbre [crest], have desired 
me ... to sett forth, ratifie and confirme his said armes and creast.s 

1548. Dethick, Norroy 

Christopher Ashton ... is discended of an house of long tyme beareing 
armes, accordingly as herein in this margent is plainely depicted, yett notwith- 
standing he [is] uncertayne under what sort and manner his predecessors bare 
there creast.^ 

1552. Dethick, Garter 

Grant of a crest to John Weld, * whos auncestors have byn the bearers of 
theis tokens and auncient armes of honnor ; and yett he, not knowing in what 
manner his saide auncestors did use and beare the same, nor what creast or cog- 
nisaunce therunto belongeth, hath required mee ... to assigne and sett forth 
unto hym and his posteritie their saide auncient armes, so as hee and they maye 
lawfully bere the same wth oute the prejudice or offence to any other person. , . . 
In consideration wherof ... I have ratified confyrmed, assigned, and sett forth 
to hym and his posteritie theis their saide auncyent armes.^ 

1555. Dethick, Garter 

For as mouch as John Bolton ... is descended of an auncient howsse bet- 
ing armes, neverthelesse he, beinge uncertayne under what sort and manner his 

1 Misc. Gen. et Her. i. 304. 2 Harl. MS. 1507, f. 210. 

3 Ibid. 1507, f. 192. 4 Ibid. 1069, f. 12. 

6 Ibid. 1507, f. 208b. 6 Ibid. 1507, f. 213b. 

7 Misc. Gen* et Her. i. 10. 



predesessores bare the same with dew dyfference, hath desiered me ... to 
ordeyne, assigne and set fourth his armes with a creste lefully to be borne. ^ 

1556. Harvey, Norroy 

Beinge requyred of John Sapcote ... to make serche in the registers and 
recordes in myne offyce for th' auncyent armes belonginge to that name and 
famylie, and I found the same w'^^ from the begynnynge pertened to that name 
and famylie whereof he is decended ; and further, consyderinge his auncesters 
vertue so well begon, and so long contynued, I could not w^owt ther grete in- 
jury assigne unto hym eny other armes then those wch from the begynnynge 
pertened to that howse and famylie.2 

1560. Dethick, Garter 

Whereas John Dugdale . . . being of longe time one of the bearers of theis 
auncient armes, videlicet, argent, a crosse molyne gules, in the dexter quarter a 
torteaux, and yet knowing certain noe creast duely appertayning thereunto.^ 

1560. Dethick, Garter 

Richard Markes of Beverley, . . . gentleman, having of longe time beene 
one of the bearers of thes auncient armes, viz : [etc.], and yett knowinge cer- 
taine of no creast appertaininge thereunto, hath requested mee ... to assigne 
[to] his said auncient armes such creast as hee may lawfully beare.* 

1 561. D ALTON, Norroy 

Being desired by Thomas Drax . . . whose ancestors have long continued 
in nobleness bearing arms, tokens of honour, not only to make search in my 
Registers and Records, but also to ratify under seal the said arms.s 

1563. Flower, Norroy 

Whereas Francis Haldenby and Robert Haldenby, his brother, of Haldenby 
in the County of York, gent., are descended of a house long tyme bearing armes, 
and being uncertain of the creast in what manner it was borne by their ances- 

1564. Flower, Norroy 

John Kay . . . being descended of a house longe tyme bearing arms, hath 
a gift of this creast graunted to his owld arms by Wm. Flower, Norroy King 
of Arms. 7 

1564. Harvey, Clarenceux 

Beinge requyred by Thom. Penystone ... to make searche for the auncyent 
armes belonging to hym from his auncestours, I have at his sute and requeste 
made dyligent searche, as well in the regysters and recordes of myne offyce, as 
also in the auncyent monumentes [muniments] and evydences of the said 

1 Misc. Gen. et Her. new ser. ii. 103. 2 Harl. MS. 11 16, f. 50. 

2 Misc. Gen. et Her. new ser. iv. 103. * Surtees Soc. 41, p. xl. 
5 Glover's Visitation of Yorkshire, 1584-5, ed. Foster, p. 480. 

« Ibid. p. 480. 7 Ibid. p. 481. 8 Harl. MS. 11 16, f. 36. 


1^6^-6. Flower, Norroy 

Whereas Thomas Huls ... is discended of a house long tyme beareing 
armes, and he, being uncertaine what manner and forme his ancesters beare 
there crest, have required me ... to assigne unto these his old antient armes 
a crest.* 

1566. Flower, Norroy 

Hugh Francklyn alias|Franckland ... is dessended of a house long time 
bearing armes, and he being uncertayne under what mannor and forme his an- 
cestors beare there creast, he hath required me ... to assigne these his old 
auncient armes a creast.2 

1568. Dethick, Garter 

Whereas Robert Segar . . . haveing long been honoured of these antient 
armes, and yet knowinge of noe creast certeyne duly appertayneing thereunto, 
hath requested me ... to assure unto his said armes such crest as he may law- 
fully beare.3 

1568. Dethick, Garter 

Whereas John Harrington . . . descended of a younger brother of the Har- 
ringtons of Brierley, co. York, by right (as one abstract from such a stock and 
descended of such auncestors) ought to be in the nomber of the bearers of those 
tokens of honor ; and yet not knowinge in what maner he ought to beare his 
armes, the tyme beinge now so longe since his auncesters first descended from 
out of the sayd house of Brierley, hath required us, etc.* 

1568. Dethick, Garter 

William Buckmynster . . . beinge berers of thosse tokens of honnor by just 
desent and prerogative of byrth from theire auncestors.^ 

1573. C00KE5 Clarenceux 

George Baker . . . being one of the bearars of these tokens of honor, as the 
Records of my office do perfectly approve.^ 

1575. C00KE5 Clarenceux 

John Harrison . . . hath required me ... to sett forth and allow unto 
him his auncient armes, with such differences in bearing and such creast ther- 
unto as may be proper.^ 

1578. Flower, Norroy 

Arthur Herrys . . . being lyneally descendid from thosse of that surname 
in the north partes of this Realme w^in my provynce, and so by just desent and 
prerogative of byrth being on of the berers of thosse tokens of honnor, from his 
auncesters, hath requyred me ... to delyver and descrybe unto hym his said 
auncyent arms.s 

1 Harl. MS. 1507, f. 50. 2 Surtees Soc. 41, p. xli. 

3 Harl. MS. 1507, f. 216. * Misc. Gen. et Her. iii. 17. 

6 Harl. MS. 1116, f. 49. « Misc. Gen. et Her. ii. i. 

7 Surtees Soc. 41, p. xli. s Harl. MS. 1116, f. 38. 



158 1. CooKEj Clarenceux 

This armes and crest is allowed to be Walter Rippon of Lond., gent., coach- 
maker to Q. Eliz., Sonne of Jeoferie, son of Tho., son of Thomas, son of Rich^, 
son of John, John was the son of Arnald Rippon of the County of Yorke, 
gent., being the antient armes of that srname and familie, as appeares by a deed 
in the xlv yeare of King Edw. the 3rd [i 371-2], wch armes the said Walter 
Rippon may beare from his ancesters.i 

1 58 1. CooKEj Clarenceux 

Being required of Matthew Mettcalfe, son of Lucas Metcalfe of Bedall, 
gentleman, to make search in the registers and recordes of my office for the 
auncient armes belonging to that name and family whereof he is descended ; 
whereupon I have made search accordingly, and do finde that he may lawfully 
beare, as his auncesters heretofore hath borne, the auncient armes hereafter 
following, that is to say, . . . silver, three calves sable.2 

1583. C00KE5 Clarenceux 

This day hath his [Sir Walter Mildmay's] sonne and heire apparent, Anthony 
Mildmay, . . . shewed unto me (in the presence of dyvers other Heralds) such 
auntient, credible and authenticall deedes, charters, recordes, wrytinges, evi- 
dences and letters, some sealed with scales of Armes, as well of their auncestors 
as of dyvers noble Erles, Barons, and other great personages ... as notwith- 
standinge any doubt that might grow thorough lenght of tyme or ignorance of 
evidence, it appeers cleerly that the said Sir Walter is by fourtene discentes 
(from father to sonne) lineally and lawfully extracted of the body of a very 
auncient gentleman of this land, called Hugh de Mildmay, who . . . lyved 
about King Stephen's tyme. . . . And as the continuance of this said gentle- 
man's house hath ben longe, and the discent therof (witnesse the evidences and 
charters aforesaid) most direct and true (being very probable to have ben a 
family of gentlemen longe beffore the farthest tyme aforesaid recyted), so it is 
as manifest, by the seuerall scales of the abovenamed Henry de Mildmay senior 
and Henry de Mildmay junior now remayning in the custody of the said Sir 
Walter, fayre and whole at their deedes emongest the evidences aforesaid, that 
an auncient cote of Armes pertayneth properly to the same house and family ; 
for these two, being great grandfather on to another, beares therein their scout- 
chions, circumscript with their proper names and surnames, three lyons ram- 
pynge, which be azure in a feild silver, for none els in this land gyves the same, 
as by most diligent searche made in the oldest and newest recordes and registers 
of myne Office is to be scene and prooved. And therfore (being therunto 
requested) here I have delyvered, under my hand and seall of myne Office, the 
said Armes, as in the margent herof depicted more playnly is shewed. Further, 
for the better contynewance therof in memory, I have subscribed a pedegree 
(bearing this date) wherin orderly and verbatim be inrolled all the said deeds, 
charters, wry tings and minimentes in the custody (as is aforesaid) of the said 
Sir Walter. Unto whome and his heires and to the heires of his father, by 
power and authority to me comytted by letters patentes under the Great Seale 
of England, and by vertue of myne office aforesaid, I do by these presentes re- 

1 Hail. MS. 1507, f. 34d. 

2 Surtees Soc. 41. p. xhi. 


Store, ratify and confirme the said armes . , . that he and they the same may 
beare, use and shewe foorth, in sheild, cote armour, or otherwise, with their due 
difference, at his or their pleasures, according to their auncient and true right. ^ 

Then comes the pedigree, and after that ' a Repertory to 
the Pedegree/ from which I make the following two extracts : — 

Henry Mildemay of Herefordshire, as appeeres by a deede of the said Henryes 
sealed with his seale of armes, bearing in a scoutchion three lyons rampant. And 
this Henry myght lyve also in the said K.H. 3 dayes, for he reigned almost Ix. 

Henry de Miledmay of Stonehouse in Glouc', as appeeres by the said Henryes 
owne deede, sealed with his Seale, bearinge lykewise in a scoutcheon three lyons 
rampaund. And this Henry lyved in E. 3 reigne, for then beares his deede date.2 

Cooke adds a quaint note on the variation in spelling ' in 
a multitude of other gent sirnames of the lande, that length of 
tyme and errours of writers have and dayly bringe into the 
same case/ 

He concludes thus : — 

And of my certayne knowledge and experience had in my Visitacions dyvers 
yeeres heertofore, there be none of this sirname of Mildemay, Mildmey, Mild- 
may, or Mildemey, in England, but on this syde Trente ; where, beinge a very 
rare name, I find them only in Essex, North', and Glouc', and these be all ex- 
tracted of one family, and be of one self and same sirname in pronunciacion and 
speache, and therfore with their orderley differences may lawfully beare (as 
their auncestors did beare) argent, three lions rampinge asure.3 

1584. Dethick, Garter 

Wheireas therfore John Jackson, sonne of Jo. Jackson of Westchester hath of 
longe time borne this armes and creast . . . wherfore I ... at the instant 
request of the sayd John Jackson have alowed, ratified and confirmed his sayd 
armes and creast to him and to his posteritye for ever.* 

1584-5. Glover, Somerset 

In his Visitation of 1584-5, Glover, Somerset, allowed to 
William Daniell of Beswick, co. York, these arms: Quarterly; 
I and 4, gules a cross gold with five eagles of gules thereon 
for Daniell ; 2 and 3 azure a fesse between three martlets 
silver, for Aslakeby. At the foot he adds this note : — 

Carta Lucias Danyell, quondam uxoris domini Willielmi Danyell, confirmans 
Roberto Danyell filio suo ; et data apud Besewyke, 1309, regno Regis Ed. filii 
Ed. 3. 

1 Misc. Gen. et Her. ii. 192. 
3 Ibid. p. 196. 

2 Ibid. p. 195. 

* Harl. MS. 1812,^47. 



And he gives a trick of the seal, representing Dame Lucy her- 
self holding two shields, the dexter having the arms of Daniell 
and the sinister those of Aslakeby/ 

1584-5. Glover 

To William Elioth of Middleton he allows the arms, gules 
a silver cheveron between two golden molets in the chief and 
a golden buck's head in the foot. He adds this note at the 
foot : — 

Sigill. Gawin Elioth : a chevron between 2 mullets in chief and a buck's head 
in base. Hoc sigillum erat antiquum ex argento sculptum.2 

1584-5. Glover 

Carta Johannis Lascy de Folketon, dat. apud Folketon, . . . anno regni 
9 Richard II., is sealed with the arms ut supra, viz. sa., a chevron between 3 
stags' heads arg. Sigillum Johannis Lascy.3 

1584-5. Glover 

Glover allowed these arms to Stephen Langdale of Ebber- 
ston : Quarterly ; i and 4, gold a cheveron between three 
molets sable, for Langdale ; 2 and 3, gules 2 cheverons gold. 
No name is given for the quartering. He quotes as his 
authority : — 

Ex antiqua sculptura olim in fundo pelvinaris argentei fixa in ipso centro 
pelvinaris, suis coloribus inamelata.* 


A coat of sable with three Catherine wheels of gold, was 
allowed to John Morley of Normanby, with this note : — 

This John Morley by his deed dated 19 October, 35 Henry VI. [1456], did 
convey certain lands . . . with his seal of arms subscribed with these words, 
* The scale of John Morley, Esq.' 

A drawing of the seal is given, but no relationship is shown 
between the two Johns.^ 

To Edward Newby of North Fenton he allows ' argent, 
2 stilts in saltier sable, laced and shod or, with a label of 3 
points gules, made very anciently in glass standing in the 
parish church of North Fenton, both with a label or without.' 

1 Glover's Visitation of Torkshire, ed. Foster, p. 125. 

a Ibid. p. 132. 3 Ibid. p. 160. * Ibid. p. 190. e Ibid. p. I94. 


A sketch is given of this very curious coat, * ex sigillo antique 
et etiam ex fenestris antiquis valde.' ' 


Bate of West Lathe. Haec arma confirmantur Leonardo Bate de Lupset 
in com. Ebor., generoso, et crista eodem Leonardo conceditur per Wm. Flower, 
Norroy, ... 8 die Februarii, ao 1565. . . . Ita quod crista spectabat eidem 
Leonardo, et non Willielmo qui nunc est de West Lath, nepoti suo ; arma di- 
cuntur in eisdem literis patentibus esse gentihcia, et ideo huic Willielmo debita. 
Sed quere inde melius. 2 

1584-5. Glover 
When arms were known to have been granted Glover 
records the fact, e.g. : — 

Insignia concessa Willielmo Strickland de Boynton super le Wold per Wil- 
lielmum Harvey, regem armorum, per literas patentes dat. anno 4 Ed. sexti, 
15 die Aprilis, sibi et posteritati suo.3 

1584-5. Glover, Somerset 

The pedigree of Thwaites of Marston, co. York, was 
recorded by Flower in his Visitation of 1564, but no arms are 
there given. When Glover came round in 1584 he records 
both arms and crest, and adds this note : — 

Arma confirmantur, crista conceditur Johanni Thwaytes de Marston in Com. 
Ebor., armigero, per Willielmum Flower, Norroy, per litteras patentes, datas 
30 Jan. ao 1564, ao 7 Reginse Elizabethae. 

This admission of Glover's is the more commendable by- 
reason of his complaint recorded at the foot of the pedigree: 
^ Misit servientem [cum] genealogia et armis, sed non solvit 
feoda ! ' * 

1584-5. Glover 

To the pedigree of Horsley of Skerpenbeck, Glover ap- 
pends this terse criticism of his predecessor in Yorkshire : 

These arms did anciently belong to William Horsley, knt., and do not at all 
appertain to this William Horsley, albeit they were to him given by William 
Flower, Norroy, ao 1563.5 

1 Glover's Visitation of Torkshire, ed. Foster, p. 313. 

2 Ibid. p. 192. 3 Ibid. p. 165. •* Ibid., p. 93. 

5 Ibid. p. 180. One is almost tempted to suggest that William Horsley had 
* sent name and county ' and — ,£76 los. (or whatever the fee then was) ; but as 
Flower was not one of the ' painter fellows,' but a properly constituted * Officer 
of Arms,' we had best leave it as an unsolvable mystery. 



The following notes will show that Glover was careful to 
see that arms were not allowed without what he considered 
sufficient proof. 

He allowed to John Dodsworth of Thornton Watlass the 
arms of silver with a cheveron between three hunting horns 
with this note : — 

Johannes Doddesworth vindicat arma de argento cum signo capitali inter 
tria cornua sabulina sed quaere an sint sibi de jure debita . . . Wayte de Comi- 
tatu Southamptoa portat arma predicta.i 

1584-5. Glover 

At the head of the pedigree of Hugh Bird of Thornthorpe, 
son of Anthony Burd [sic] of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Glover 
writes : — 

Probaturus arma per testimonium maioris et aliorum de Novo Castro super 


William Graunt of Roxby, Esq., is thus severely shown 

Ignobilis, licet per cartas fictitias genus suum a nobilibus derivere conaret.^ 
1586. Cooke, Clarenceux 

Being required of Thomas Holbeck ... to make searche in the regesters 
and recordes of my office for the ancient arms of that name and famully whereof 
he is decended, . . . I . . . doe finde that he is lyneally descended from the 
auncient howse of the Holbechs . . . who of longe continuance hath borne for 
their armes, etc.* 

1586. Flower, Norroy 

William Ferrand ... is well borne and dessended of progenitors bearing 
signes and tokens of their race and gentrie called armes. . . . He may beare 
quarterly thesse two seuerall coats of armes, etc.^ 

1588. Dethick, Garter 

By the authorite and custome of my office ... I am to take generall notice 
and to make testimony and records for all matters and causes of armes, honor 
and chivalry, and for all pedigrees and descents of nobles and gent ... to th' 
end that auncient names and families and descents may have and enjoy theis 
due ensignes of their armes ; so it is that Robert Jason . . . brought unto mee 

1 Glover's Visitation of Torkshire^ ed. Foster, p. 266. 

2 Ibid. p. 180. 3 Ibid. p. 256. 
* Surtees Soc. 41, p. xlii. ^ Ibid. 


theis his armes, depicted in an old parchment booke of their pedegrees, left 
unto hime by his ancessors, required me ... to take notice and to make gen- 
erall testimony of record for him ... of the sheild of his armes and creast . . . 
as of due right belonging unto their auntient name and famile • In regard wherof 
I have blaze and exemplified the same by theise presentes.i 

1592. Dethick, Garter 

Whereas by the authority and custome of my office, from the Queenes most 
Excellent Ma^ie and her most noble Progenitors, I am to take generall notice 
and record and to make publique declaration and testimony of all cause of 
armes ... to the end that like as some by their auntient names . . . and de- 
scents have, use and enjoy these ensignes and coates of armes, so others for theire 
. . . vertues . . . and desertes . . . bee knowne ... by these eschocheons 
of honor . . . wherefor being solissited and by credible report informed that 
John Eldred . . . who is descended of auntient linage . . . and being requested 
to make declaration and testimonie for his armes as may best agree with the 
recordes and proofe shewed in my office, I . . . doe signifie, conferme, blazen 
and exemplifie this sheild or coat of armes to the said John Eldred, as rightly 
discending unto him from John Eldred his father and other his auncestors be- 
fore named.2 

1593. Dethick, Garter 

Upon intelligence and proof made in my office by Robert Lee, late elected 
one of the Aldermen of this City of London, the sonn of Umph. Lee, decended 
from Reginall Lee, chief patron and founder of the Parish Church of Lee in the 
County of Stafford, as by their evidences and Court Rolls is manifest ; and for 
that the said Reginall Lee of Lee, auncester to the said Robert, . . . did beare 
in his scale and monument this forme and sheld of armes, as in testimonie in 
Records thereof made may appeare ; and for more perfect demonstracion and 
record, I have thought good to signifie and declare . . . the said antient sheild 
and coate of armes.^ 

1596. Dethick, Garter 

This armer w^l^outt the canton is acknowledged to bee the auntientt armes 
of Sir Alexander Lowndes, kt., and confirmd to Tho. Lownde [sic], com. Line, 
per Wm. Dethick, Garter.* 

1599. Segar, Norroy 

Quum Jacobus Pennyman, . . . pro suo erga paternam familiam amore, 
a me petiit ut scuto ... a majoribus familiae suae ab antiquo gesto et usitato, 
cristam . . . assignarem ; ego . . . arma . . . prout fuerint usitata, unacum 
crista . . . declaranda duxi.s 

1600. Camden, Clarenceux 

Forasmuch as it evidently and plainely appeareth by divers and sundry 
auncient evidence, dated the fieft yeare of King Edward the third, that the 

1 Harl. MS. 1470, f. 57. 2 Ibid. 1172, f. 43. 

3 Ibid. 1507, f. 10. * Ibid. 1069, f. 37. 

5 Surtees Soc. 41, p. xliv. 



ancestors of George Hyde of South Denchworth in the county of Berks, Esquier, 
have heretofore in their seales used for their devise or cognizaunce a lance or 
horseman's staff, with a flagge or cornet thereat, etc. ; And being required by 
the said George Hyde, esquier, to ratefie and confirme unto him the said devise, 
empresse or cognizance, have at his request ratefied and confirmed, and by theis 
presentes doe ratefie and confirme, etc.i 

1602. Dethick and Camden 

Whereas wee have been credibly informed that George Smithes . . . hath 
and may use and beare this shield or Coate of Armes . . . And forasmuch as the 
testimony and record for all matters and causes of armes, honor, and pedigrees 
doth appertayne to our Offices, we have thought good to blaze and exemplifie 
the same.2 

1608. Herald not mentioned 

Being required by Mr. John Morgan ... to sett downe his paternal! coate, 
with his due differences, discended unto him from his ancesters . . . Know all 
men that he doth and may beare . . . the which coate and creast I doe allowe, 
ratifie and confirme.3 

1 612. SegaRj Garter 

Whereas William and George Chaundler . . . doe beare for their ancient 
coate armor [etc.], and wantinge further for an ornament unto the same a con- 
venient creast or cognizance fitt to be borne, I . . . have appointed and as- 
signed them such a one as they may lawfully beare.* 

1603-33. Undated. Segar, Garter 

Theis Armes belongd to Reynald Chowning alias Chevening of Chevening 
in Com. Kent, as are proved by antient deeds and seales of Sir Adam Chevening, 
tempore Edw. 2 quinto, and of John de Chevening for rent levied in Sandrich, 
25to Edw. 3tii. Thus subscribed. Will™ Segar, Garter Principall King of 
Armes, to an eschochion on vellam.^ 

1603-33. Undated. Segar, Garter 

Whereas I . . . doe fynd by antient deeds and other testimonyes of anti- 
quity to me produced,that this Coate of Armes herein depicted hath of long tyme 
byn properly borne by the name of Wigfall in the Countye of Derby. And ther- 
fore doe hereby under my hand confirme the same, as in right yt duely apper- 
tayneth, to Zachary, the sonne of George Wigfall, lyneally discended from the 
predecessors of his name and family.^ 

1 61 2. Camden, Clarenceux 

Being required of John Merkaunt ... to make search in the registers and 
records of my Office for the auncient armes belonging to that name and famely 

1 Misc. Gen. et Her. new ser. iii. 53. 
3 Harl. MS. 1507, f. 195b. 
G Ibid. 1 144, f. 16. 

2 Ibid. ii. 96. 

< Ibid. 1 172, f. 9b. 

« Ibid. 1410, f. 46. 


whereof hee is descended, ... I have made search accordinglie, and doe findc 
that his auncestors have of long time borne for their auncient coate of armes . . . 
and for that I finde noe creast to the same armes, as to many auncient coates 
ther is none, hee hath required me ... to deliver unto him his said auncient 
armes with a creast ... for the accomplishment whereof I . . . have assigned 
given and graunted ... to his auncient armes for his creast, etc.i 

1 612. St. George, Norroy 

Knowe ye that by the authoritie of my Office from the Kinges Most Ex- 
cellent Majestic by his letters pattents under the Create Seale of England for 
all matters and caussis of armes, pedegres, and descents of honnor and chivalry, 
my predecessors formerly have been and I am accustomed to make declaration 
and testimony of the shildes and coates of armes, creastes and cognoscences 
descended unto gentlemen either from their auncestors or by desertes given unto 
them as signes and tokenes of their valorous and faithfuU service to ther Prince 
and Countrey, eyther in warr or peace . . . and being required of Thomas 
Charlton ... to make search in the regesters and recordes of myne Office for 
the Armes belonging to that name and family, which at his gentle request I have 
don accordingly, and doe finde that he may beare, as his auncesters have don 
before him, etc.2 

1 61 2. St. George, Norroy 

At the head of the pedigree of Withes of Copgrove are 
recorded these arms : — 

Azure, three griffins passant in pale, gold. Mr. Charles Withes of Cop- 
grove shewed this coate, but could make no proof of it, but saith he was de- 
scended from Withes of Norfolke.^ 

1 6 13. St. George, Norroy 

Whereas John Tenaunt ... is very well descended of an auncient family, 
and is very well allyed, and of good estate, reputation and quallytye, and doth 
challenge as belonging to his name and blood thease armes : Ermine, two 
barres sables, charged with three besants ; and hath required the said Norroy 
to allowe and confirme the said armes unto the said John Tenantt and his 
yeares [sic ; ? heirs], that they may remaine readye to be shewed, and 
registred and recorded, as they ought to be, and as belongeth to my said office : 
Now I . . . haveing made search and dew inquirey of the premisses, and finding 
such good causes that the said John Tenant should be knowne, accepted, . . . 
and registerd amongst gentlemen, and of so vertuos behavor in the comon wealth, 
and of such worth and desert to beare armes, have thought good to condesend 
to his just request, and doe . . . give, grante, allowe, confirme, and examplify 
unto the said John Tenantt, gentleman, and his heires, the said armes blazed as 

1 Harl. MS. ii72,f.9. 

3 Misc. Gen. et Her. new ser. iv. 109. 

3 Glover's Visitation of Torkshire, ed. Foster, p. 591. 

* Surtees Soc. 41, p. xlvii. 


1 613. St. George, Norroy 

Being requested hy George Lacock ... to assigne unto him the armes of 
his ancestors in such manner as he and his posterity may lawfully beare the same 
... I have therfore assigned unto him theise theire said armes, . . . and 
finding no creast of right belonging to the aforesaid armes, I have likewise 
assigned this creast.i 

1 6 14. Camden, Clarenceux 

Know yee, that whereas by the authority of my Office from the King's most 
excellent Majesty under the great Seale of England for all matters and causes of 
armes, I have been accustomed to make declaracion and to testifie of shieldes, 
coates of armes, creasts and cognizances, discended to gentlemen either from 
their ancestors, or by desearts given to them as signes and tokens of their vertue 
valour and f aithfull service to their Prince and Country, either in warre or peace, 
whereby they should bee incouraged to goe forward in all vertue and noblenes, 
that they and their posterity may for ever be enrolled amongst the gentry.2 

1 6 14. Camden, Clarenceux 

Whereas Robert Syer . . . being discended of a family antiently beareing 
armes, hath requested me to make search how he may beare his armes w*out 
prejudice to any of the said family and surname, and the same to exemplifie, 
emblazen and testifie.^ 

1 61 7. Camden, Clarenceux 

Whereas Edward Bishe . . . being descended of a family . . . who were 
sometyme the owners of a mannor called the mannor of Bish, . . . and is not 
onely able to prove the antiquity of the said family by divers other descents, by 
writeings and evidences to me produced and shewed forth, but alsoe by beareing 
of armes.* 

1622. Camden, Clarenceux 

The due consideration hereof [i.e. letters patent of baronetcy] hath moved 
me ... to peruse and view sundry wills, testaments, records and other evi- 
dences, shewed and presented unto me by the said Sir Hugh Middleton to be 
well borne and descended of such as have borne armes and tokens of their race 
and gentry.5 

1624. St. George, Clarenceux 

Wheras William Cage, esquire, one of the Ouster-barristers at Lawe of Lin- 
coln's Inne, . . . hath requested me ... to make search how his ancestours 
did and how hee may beare their ancient armes, and the same to exempHfie, 
blason, testifie, confirme and alowe." 

1 Harl. MS. 1170, f. 22. 

2 Ibid. 1 172, f. 10. Camden used the same formula in 1612 ; see Misc. 
Gen. et Her. i. 228. 

3 Harl. MS. 1507, f. 173. * Ibid. 1507, f. 183b. 

6 Ibid. 1507, f. 1 80b. « Ibid. 1470, f. 43 ; 1507, f. 196. 


1628. Segar, Garter 

Declare quod Gulielmus Turbett ... ex antiqua et insigni familia ejusdem 
nominis oriundus sit, et arma istius portat.i 

1 63 1. St. George, Clarenceux 

Wheras it apperteineth unto mee by reason of my office of Clarenceux to 
certifie and declare the descents and armes of such as are gent, of birth and blood, 
and to distinguish them from others of meane ranke and quality, ... I have at 
the just and lawfuU request and desire of George Thorold of Boston in the 
County of Lincolne, gent., made search and inquiery into his blood and family, 
and doe finde as well by a very old seale of armes at this tyme in his custody, as 
by other credible and good sufficient testimony, that hee the said George is a 
branche of the family of the Thorolds of that County, and that hee and his 
ancestors have for severall descents borne the armes of the said family with a 
distinction and difference, w^^ difference tyme hath so defaced as it cannot bee 
well descerned ; 2 for w"^^ reasons and consideracions hee hath requested me to 
assigne unto his foresaid armes some such certayne distinction as may be properly 
borne by him and his descendants for ever--'' 

1632. St. George, Clarenceux 

Being required by Leonard Browne . . . whose ancestors have for many 
descents lived in reputacion and borne armes as properly belong to their name 
and family, yet wanting a creast therunto, etc.* 

1633. Burroughs, Garter 

Know yee that Moore Fauntleroy, gent., sonne of John Fauntleroy, gent., 
the onely sonne of William Fauntleroy . . . who bare for his coate armour . . . 
which armes they and their auncestors have borne tyme out of minde ; and now 
being desired ... to imblazon and sett forth his said coate of armes . . . the 
which armes and creast ... I ... do by theise presents declare, assigne, con- 
firme and grant unto the aforesaide Moore Fauntleroy.^ 

1634. St. George, Clarenceux 

Being required by Peter Faringdon alias Farnden ... to make search in 
the registers and recordes of myne office for his descent, and for such armes as 
aunciently to that family appertaineth . . . and allso hath desired my exem- 
plificacion and attestacion in that behalfe ... I do herby publish and declare 
his armes to bee as followeth, etc.^ 

1634. Le Neve, Norroy 

Whereas Sir Wilham Robinson . . . knight, is desirous to alter and change 
his creast and some partes of the bearing of his paternall armes, which by right 
of desent belong unto him as cheife and eldest of his family.^ 

1 Surtees Soc. 41, p. xlix. 2 Referring apparently to the seal. 

3 Harl. MS. 1470, f. 24. * Ibid. 1470, f. 13. 

B Ibid. 1470, f. 153. 6 Ibid. 1470, f. 5. 

Surtees Soc. 41, p. xlix. 



1638. Henry St. George, Norroy 

The auntient armes of the familey of Bavand of the citty of Chester, as it 
hath byn borne by that faniiley, and so standith upon severall monuments in 
St. Werburges Church and other Churches in the sayd Citty ; to w^^ auntient 
armes I have . . . assigned this creast . . . w^^ sayd armes and creast above 
depicted I do confirme and ratyfie, etc.i 

1653. Ryley, Norroy 

Wheras Samuell Rowe of Macclesfeld ... is lineally discended of the 
auntient and generous family of the Rowes of Macclesfeild aforesaid, whose name 
and family have auntiently borne for their coate armour as foUoweth ... as 
appeareth by verie good testimonie, and the said coate armour was carved in 
stone upon the steeple of Macclesfeild at the foundation therof, which is there 
to be seene at this day. And wheras also it doth not appeare unto me what creast 
doth properly belong to that family, I . . . have added and assigned unto the 
said coate armour, as aforesaid, this creast . . . w^h creast v^th the armes afore- 
said I doe by these presents confirme.2 

1657. Ryley, Norroy 

Wheras William Cholwich of Cholwich in the county of Devon, gent., who 
is lyneally discended from that auntient and generous family of Cholwich afore- 
said . . . whose name and family have auntiently borne for their coate armour 
three cheverons and a file of as many lambeauxes (as by seueraU old deeds seales 
[sic] with the said armes may appeare), but because there are noe coUours to the 
said armes, and that by the injury and length of tyme, and other misfortunes, it 
hath happened that the tymber, helme and creast unto the said family belonging, 
cannot for the present be founde ; I . . . doe by these presentes certifie and 
declare that the said William Cholwich . . . may beare the said armes in this 
manner, viz., per pale or and argent, three cheverons sable, ouer all a file of as 
many lambeauxes gules, with this creast . . . which coate and creaste I . . . 
doe by these presentes certifie and declare that the said William Cholwich and 
his posterity may lawfully beare ... for ever.3 

1660. Walker, Garter 

Whereas the descent and armes of the family of Bulteel is entered in the 
Visitation of the City of London made in the year 1633, by which it is evident 
that the said family is originally of the City of Turnay in Flanders ; and whereas 
it doth farther appeare unto mee that those of that surname and family have 
aunciently borne another coate of armes then what is entred in the said Visit- 
ation, I . . . hereby ratify and confirm . . . the auncient coate of armes so 
borne and used, etc.* 

1665. Dugdale, Norroy 

This family [the Foljambes] have for many ages used their armes w*^ sup- 
porters ; viz. an antilope quarterly sable and or, and a tyger ar.s 

1 Misc. Gen. et Her. i. 278. 2 Harl. MS. 1470, f. 64. 
3 Ibid. 1470, f. 147. * Misc. Gen. et Her. new ser. iv. 421. 

"5 Visitation of Torkshire, Surtees Soc. 36, p. 53. 



Note to the pedigree of Frankland of Thirkelby : — 

Qu. how this family is descended from Hugh Frankland of Nelling in co. 
Ebor. to whom these armes were granted by W. Flower, Norroy.^ 

1665. DuGDALE, NoRROY 

Note to the pedigree of Simpson of Ryton : — 
He produced these armes depicted on a tablet. Qu : for better proofe.2 

1666. DuGDALE, NoRROY 

He allows to John Otway of Ingmer Hall, silver with a 
cheveron sable, over all a pile azure counterchanged ; and adds 
this note : — 

For proofe of these armes he voucheth his father's seale, who died at the age 
of 88 yeares.^ 

The father died 10 Feb. 1648. 

1 67 1. [Herald not mentioned ; probably Walker, Garter] 

Whereas [William, Christopher, James, and Simon Smith] . . . sons of 
Christopher Smith . . . have desired me to assigne them such collers [sic] as 
they may lawfully beare unto a coate that they have a very just and resonable 
pretense unto, having a seale of there grandfather's, Walter Smith, . . . and 
seuerall auntient deeds and evidenses sealed with the same, many of which I 
have seene and perused ; and being willing to gratefie so many worthey persons 
in theire so just a request, by the authority committed to me under the Great 
Seale of England, I doe assigne unto . . . them . . . thease collers following, 
viz : on a feild or 3 martletts purpure, untill upon dilligent serch they shall find 
what were the originall collers of the said coate of armes and seale they doe pre- 
tend unto.* 


The evidence here printed has been collected from such 
MSS. and printed sources as were most readily available at 
the British Museum. I must apologize for the length of it, 
but it was absolutely necessary to give a large number of ex- 
amples. Otherwise I should be met with the airy pooh-pooh 
that they were mere isolated instances of good-natured laxity. 

1 Visitation of Torkshire^ Surtees Soc. 36, p. 78. 

2 Ibid. p. 124. 

3 Ibid. p. 385. 

* Harl. MS. 1172, fo. 39. ' 




Little comment is needed, but I may be allowed to point 
out one or two of the more striking cases. 

There is a goodly number of cases where the arms are 
allowed and certified on the strength of old seals ; one of an 
enamelled shield formerly in the bottom of a bowl ; one of a 
glass window in a church ; two of monuments in churches ; 
one of a shield carved on a church tower ; one of arms 
^ depicted on a tablet,' which Dugdale recorded in 1665, with 
the note, ' Qu. for better proofed In one of the seal cases, 
in 1666, Dugdale allowed a coat to John Otway, for which he 
vouched his father's seal ; the father died in 1648, aged 88, 
and was therefore bore in 1560. In this case we have a user 
of less than a century if the seal really was the father's and 
not older, for the father would hardly have a seal of his arms 
when he was six years old. 

There are two cases where the authority cited is a heraldic 
manuscript, not a Visitation, and apparently not emanating 
from any herald. One of these is the well-known collection 
of the arms of mayors of Newcastle-on-Tyne.^ The other 
was a parchment book of pedigrees produced to William 
Dethick in 1588. As this is not stated to be a copy of a 
visitation pedigree, or indeed to be the work of a herald at all, 
we may fairly assume that it was not. Yet on the strength of 
this. Garter allows the arms ' as of due right,' and exemplifies 
the same accordingly. 

There are two remarkable cases in which prescription, user 
— call it what you will — actually overrides a grant. The first 
of these is the Mildmay case in 1583. Sir Walter Mildmay 
had obtained a grant from Gilbert Dethick, Garter, in 1554, 
of azure with a silver bend and a sable pegasus thereon. In 
1583 he produced some old family seals showing that his 
ancestors bore silver with three lions of azure,^ which coat 
Cooke thereupon proceeded to ' restore, ratify and confirme.' 

In the Bulteel case of 1660, the arms had been entered at 
the visitation of Loudon in 1633, but on being shown that 
the family had 'aunciently borne another coate of armes,' 
Walker, Garter, ratifies and confirms ' the auncient coate of 
armes so borne and used.' 

^ Printed at the end of Tonge's Visiiation of the Northern Counties, Surtees 
Society, vol. 41. 

2 It is not clear whence the colours were derived, as no authority but that 
of the seals is cited. 


Finally, there are two cases of most striking significance, 
the granting of colours to arms proved by seals which did not 
show the colours. These are the Cholwich grant by Ryley, 
Norroy, in 1657, and the Smith grant in 1671, probably by 
Walker, Garter. In each of these cases colours were assigned 
to the arms, in the later case until the ' originall coUers ' be 
found, and in neither case is anything granted but the colours. 

If we place a selection of the terms used by the heralds in 
a tabular form, the recognition of a prescriptive right is shown 
very clearly. 

1394. habet justum titulum hereditarium. 

1456. the right armes ... his progenitors time out of mind hath borne. 

1470. ab olim et antique jure. 

1470. neither can the memory of man recollect. 

i486, such arms as to him belongeth . . . with lawful! difference. 

1494. the very armes of his predecessors. 

1522. ausilonguement . . . portant armes. 

1535. an old ancyent house bearinge armes. 

1536. the very right armes of his said auncestours and their predecessors. 

1537. his ancetors hath long contynowed . . . beryng armes. 
^537* ^ good howse undefamed beryng armes.i 

1556. th' auncyent armes belonginge to that name and famylie . . . w^'* 
from the begynnynge pertened to that howse and famylie. 

1564. the auncyent armes belonging to hym from his auncestours. 

1568. haveing long been honoured of these antient armes. 

1568. by right . . . ought to be in the nomber of the bearers of those 
tokens of honor. 

1568. berers of thosse tokens of honnor by just descent and prerogative of 

byrth from theire auncestors. 
1 5 8 1 . may beare from his ancesters. 

1 5 8 1 . he may lawfully beare, as his auncesters heretofore hath borne. 
1584-5. armor dicuntur . . . esse gentilicia, et ideo . . . debila. 
1586. dessended of progenitors bearing signes and tokens . . . called armes. 
1592. rightly discending unto him from his father . . . and other his 

1599. scutum . . . a majoribus familiae suae ab antiquo gestum et usitatum. 
1 61 2. his auncestors have of long time borne for their auncient coate of 

1633. their auncestors have borne tyme out of minde. 

1653. whose name and family have auntiently borne for their coate armour. 
1 67 1, a coate that they have a very just and resonable pretense unto. 

I confidently submit that, to any unbiassed mind, to any 
one who is not obsessed with a preconceived idea, or who is 
not personally interested in upholding the contrary view, the 

1 This, with slight variations, is a very common form. 



evidence here put forward confirms Dugdale's statement, and 
clearly proves that down to his time the ordinary practice of 
the kings of arms was to recognize and allow as of right all 
arms that were proved by a reasonable length of user, and 
which did not infringe the rights of other persons. 


(To be continued,) 


THE MS. from which we draw these illustrations^ is one 
of notable importance. Its first part has the story of the 
graal, the dish out of which the last supper was eaten and which 
received the blood of Christ. This holy dish was carried by 
Joseph of Arimathea to England. The second part of the MS. 
tells of the quest of the wonder-working graal by the knights 
of the Round Table. At the end is the story of the death of 
Arthur. The MS. has been in many famous hands. On one 
page we have the signatures of Elysaheth the kyngys dowther^ 
afterwards queen to Henry VII. ; Cecyl the kyngys dowther^ who 
married John, Viscount Welles ; and Jane Grey, Other owners 
have left their mark. Ceste livre est a moy Richard Roos chivaler^ 
very coarsely written, has been misread into a statement of 
ownership by Richard Rex Anglie. Thys hoke ys myne dame 
Alyanor Haute proclaims another lady whose long fingers have 
turned these tall leaves, and on the last fly-leaf we have E, 
Wydevyll^ the mother of the ladies Elizabeth and Cecily. 

The little pictures at the chapter heads are of the greatest 
interest to the student of costume, and more especially to the 
student of arms and armour. Although they are probably by 
French artists, they are near enough to the English work to assist 
us in our study of English costume. We are here in the first 
quarter of the fourteenth century. Armory is atl ast coming to 
its full value as a decoration. The charges upon shields and 
alettes are drawn delicately and surely, as will be shown by the 
lion upon the shield of the evil King Tholomes. In only one 
case are they borne upon the knight's coat, of which two prin- 
cipal forms are shown ; the one a sleeveless or short sleeved 
coat of stout stuff, the other a sleeveless garment of a thinner and 
lighter web, hanging in light folds and resembling the surcoat 
of the thirteenth century in all but its shortened skirts. The 
armour draws attention by the 'alettes' worn by nearly aU the 
knights. These curious pieces come first into use in the last 

1 MS. Royal, 14 E. iii. Brit. Mus. 




quarter of the thirteenth century and the fashion endures for 
some fifty years. Fastened by laces and tags to the back or 
side of the shoulder they filled several uses. They helped to 
cover the weak spot at the armpit which the knight who would 
use his arms freely must perforce leave ill protected. Like 
the high ridged plates of a later period they offered some de- 
fence against a sweeping sword blow at the neck, and above 
all they offered a new field for the work of the arms-painter. 
Were they not sometimes found unemblazoned this last reason 
might have been pressed as the main argument for their use. 
That their adornment was sometimes of the richest is shown 
by the inventory of the goods of the wretched Piers de Gava- 
ston who owned alettes 'garnished and fretted with pearls.* 
Their shape is usually square or oblong but the round and other 
shapes have been noted. In one of our pictures a very rare 
form is seen — the lozenge shaped. That this is not an oblong 
alette canted sidelong is shown by the cross upon it. 

Plates are remarkably infrequent, nothing being seen of 
them but here and there a knee cop and greave, most of the 
knights being head to foot in mail. The round bason shaped 
bassinet occurs and the great helm, strengthened by bars and 
stays and with a high pointed top. There are no crests, 
although the two knights jousting with blunt lances wear 
streaming from the summit of the helm two long cords, 
knotted and tasselled, and the helm of the strange knight in 
the wood has a splendid scarf. The two knights on trapped 
horses wear from their helms long scarves with ends like 

Galahad and the strange knight speaking with him have 
the latest fashion in headpieces, a bassinet with a movable 
vizor, which vizor is shown pushed back over the crown. 


Here Evalach falls upon the host of Tholomes, king 
OF Babylon, in a sortie from the city of Orkanz 

The knights for the most part cover their heads with coifs 
of mail. One or two round-topped bassinets are seen and 
helms with pointed tops. The alettes, where worn, are square. 
No plates upon legs or arms. The body is covered with a 
loose coat reaching to the knee, and here sleeveless. These 
red and blue coats are not blazoned with arms, and are drawn 
as though of a stout material. 

Here Evalach sends his serjeant to spy upon the doings 
OF Tholomes and his host 

The Serjeant, as he pricks forward over the drawbridge of 
Evalach's castle, is of the normal type of the fully armed 
man at arms as we have him in these pictures. No plates are 
seen, the banded mail covering head and foot. The blue coat 
edged with white lines is here worn with a loose sleeve. 


Here the white knight, who comes to aid Evalach in 
HIS captivity, takes the bridle of Tholomes, and 


Evalach and Tholomes wear great crowns over their coifs 
of mail. The mysterious white knight who eut a son col un 
blanc escu a une vermelle crois has the same bearing upon his 
coat. King Tholomes has a red shield upon which is a white 
lion passant (drawn as though a rampant lion were turned 
athwart the shield). His square alettes have the same lion, 
whilst those of Evalach are black with a white luce or other 
fish. The skirts of Evalach's coat are very loose and full, 
and seem to follow an older fashion than most of the coats 
here shown. 

Here Flegentyne the good wife of Nasciens goes to 


The lady, be she Flegentyne or Sarracynte, gives us a good 
example of the dress of a woman of rank. Her hair is 
wrapped up in a red net or kerchief with white spots and 
bound round the brows and chin with a white band. Her 
upper gown reaching nearly to the ground has a wide hood 
and long sleeves. These sleeves hang at her sides, her arms 
being thrust through armholes cut below the shoulders. Here 
is an early instance of those false gown-sleeves which endured in 
English fashions as late as the ceremonial gowns of the seven- 
teenth century. The under gown is long skirted and tight sleeved. 
The foremost gentleman has a hooded coat to the knee with 
loose sleeves half way down the forearm. Another coat of 
the same length and worn below the other has tight sleeves 
buttoned from elbow to wrist. His head has a white coif. 
The second and third gentlemen have party-coloured hosen. 

^ This seems the most probable explanation of the picture which neverthe- 
less may represent the baronage coming to ask pardon of Queen Sarracynte. 


Here Flegentyne bids them build three tombs [near 


Flegentyne and her lady-in-waiting wear white wimples 
and kerchiefs, and upper gowns very loose with large hoods. 
Their under-sleeves are tight and buttoned. The head cover- 
ing of the master carver who receives her bidding is an early 
form of the turban hat with its liripipe, which was to become 
so popular in the later middle ages. 


The gentleman and his wife are the most noteworthy 
figures. His hooded coat of red is slit from the fork of the leg 
to the knee, and has buttons down the breast. He and his 
wife have each short loose sleeves over tight sleeves to the 
wrist. The bishop has a blue chasuble with a red amice. 



How Nasciens aboard of Solomon's ship is found by an 
ADMIRAL [amiraus] and his fleet, and how they give 

HIM food for ruth AND PITY 

How Nasciens is awakened out of his sleep on the ship 

Seemingly it is a male figure which hands to Nasciens the 
large round loaf, and it may be the amiraus himself thus 
hooded for seafaring. His head is wrapped in a white coif 
or kerchief under the red hood. The knights have large 
oblong alettes with their arms — silver with a fesse and label of 
gules — and gules with a silver eagle. Here again we see the 
hat worn by the master carver of the last picture. 


Here the sinful Bademagus, who has ridden into the 


The squire, as the serjeant in an earlier picture, has no 
alettes, which would suggest at first sight that alettes belong 
only to the full equipment of the greater folk in arms. This 
however is disproved by the fact that we see them worn by the 
squire in a later picture of this series. The white knight and 
the squire have each broad sword-belts. 


The headpieces of the two knights take the most advanced 
form shown in these pictures, a round bassinet with a large 
movable vizor, which vizor is lighted in one case with a broad 
slit athwart the eyes and in the other with round holes. 
Galahad's lozenge-shaped alettes show a very rare form. It will 
be seen that in sidelong figures the alettes are worn sidelong, 
but full faced figures, and figures such as this white knight, 
show the alettes in the position which the eflligies would teach 
us was their natural one, that at the back of the shoulder. 



Here Melians, Galahad's squire, rides on the adventure 


Melians and the strange knight wear sugarloaf helms 
strengthened by bands. The equipment of the strange knight 
is worthy of note. He wears knee-cops and greaves — the 
first we have yet noted in this series — and from the point of 
his helm streams a splendid forked mantle of great size and 

Here Gawain, Gheheries, and Ywain meet with the 


The seven brothers being shown as eight, we have here 
seven helmed heads and four with uncovered faces. The 
arms on shields and alettes are very boldly drawn, but it will 
be observed that we have again no bearings on the coats. 
Gawain's shield is of silver with a quarter of gules. 



How Galahad comes to a castle where there is a 
tourney between those within and those without. 
Here he has unhorsed Gawain, who, with Ector, 
IS aiding the outsiders. 

Galahad's helm, shield, alettes, and sword-belt are all 
characteristic of the period. His adversary has knee-cops and 



This picture of two knights riding up to take the one a 
triangular pennon, the other a square banner, is valuable as 
showing the fully-trapped horse, whose trappers are here of 
moderate length. The streamers from the helms, long and 
stole-like, will be noted, and the blazoned trumpet banner. 

The arms upon the pennon are of gules with a green 
cheveron between three molets of gold. The square banner 
is of sable with three golden eagles between two silver bends. 
As these arms recur in the decorations of the book, they have 
in them some clue to its first owner. 




The sword and buckler play of this picture is with very- 
heavy singlehanded swords and round bucklers of about 
eighteen inches in width. The banner of the bagpipe has, like 
the trumpet banners of Chaucer, come to be decorated with a 
blazon. One swordsman wears the familiar linen coif tied 
under the chin. Both would seem to have gowns of three- 
quarter length, kilted up in their girdles for ease in the sword 
play. These gowns follow the long-established fashion or 
large armholes and loose sleeves, tightening below the elbow. 



This most spirited picture of a joust shows the lance 
couched and directed with hand and elbow. From the points 
of the tall helms float long cords knotted here and there, and 
ending in tassels. The lances have blunt coronels in place of 
sharp heads, and are about twelve feet long. 

The grotesque figure above grasps in the hand at the end 
of its tail a good example of the knightly sword — at this period 
a singlehanded one. 


[Every now and again a fresh * reserve ' is thrown open, and we all troop in. 
We have not exhausted the territories which were open to us before, but 
we are all eager to browse over the new ground. The appearance of a new 
list, or of a new calendar, are the great events of life for some of us. 
Thus the List of Early Chancery Proceedings^ now being issued, has opened 
for us a wonderful collection of the most varied human interest. For 
later periods, when abundant evidence is available from other sources, the 
records of the Court of Chancery are invaluable, as the amazing pedigree 
contributed by Mr. Edward Alexander Fry to the Ancestor has very 
aptly demonstrated ; and their value is certainly not less over a period 
when testamentary documents are relatively rare and parish registers non- 
existent. The list, at any rate, has given me great pleasure, and I hope 
that by copying a few of the cases, and by trying to show how they com- 
pare with the information obtainable elsewhere, I may make my 


A LADY is mentioned in the printed Calendar of Inquisitions 
Post Mortem^ Henry VII. vol. i., who has always seemed 
to me to be entitled to a place in the ' Peerages/ but whose 
name I have never been able to find there. By a writ of diem 
clausit dated i8 October, 1496, the escheator in Essex is 
ordered to inquire what lands were held by ' Margaret, late 
the wife of John Hevenyngham, knight.' It was found, 
accordingly, by inquisition on 10 November following that 
'Thomas Selynger and John Hevenyngham, knights,' being 
seised of a third of the manor of Stanstede Mountfichet, gave 
it to * Lady Margaret Clynton, widow, late the wife of Walter 
Hungerford, esquire,' for life, with remainder to the heirs of 
Walter's body ; that she was seised of the said third accord- 
ingly, and that she died, i February, 1495-6, leaving Nicholas 
Hungerford, aged 27 and more, her son and heir, who is also 
heir of the body of the said Walter. 

It would appear from this that she was thrice married, to 
Clinton, Hungerford and Hevenyngham successively, and it is 
clear that such a claim as I have advanced on her behalf must 
be in respect of her match with Clinton. She does not how- 




ever occur in any pedigrees of the Lords Clinton that I have 
been able to see, and in the absence of some particular descrip- 
tion of her first husband there did not seem much hope of 
establishing her rights, if they existed, to the distinction. 

Still, in a pedigree of her second husband, entered at the 
Visitation of Wilts in 1623, and in, apparently, the best MS. 
of it, I found her described in much the same way, for it is 
recorded that ' Walterus Hungerford duxit relictam Domini 
de Clinton,' though in a pedigree of the Hungerford family, 
entered similarly at the Visitation of Gloucestershire, her first 
marriage is ignored and she appears merely as 'Margaret, 
daughter of John St. Leger.* 

The memory becomes stored with similar litde conun- 
drums, waiting on circumstance for their solution. Half for- 
gotten, they re-emerge, to make the new list, or new calendar, 
the most fascinating reading, as fresh clues to old difficulties 
face one upon every page. Thus, in due time, I met with my 
lady again, in the List of Early Chancery Proceedings^ and 
this time the document, moreover, proving to be in English, 
her quality was much more satisfactorily defined : — 

To the right reuerent fader in god the Bisshop of Bathe and Welles 
Chaunceller of England 

Mekely besechen your gracious lordship your humble Oratours Walter 
Hungerford Squyer and Margaret his wif late the wif of John late lord 
Clynton and John Brokeman Squyer and Florence his wif doughters of John 
Seyntleger Squyer, that where the said John Seyntleger amonges other 
thynges ordeyned by his last wille that the said Margaret and 
Florence and one Alice another of his doughters and euerych of 
them shuld haue to ther manage .c. marc in money and yf it shuld happe 
any of the said Margaret Florence or Alice affore the contentacion of the said 
money to them seuerelly to be made, to die, that thanne they or she that 
ouerlived shuld be heir to other of the said .c. marc, And ther uppon the said 
John Seyntleger made one John Home nowe deed and Laurence Miller yet 
lyvyng his exeeutours willyng and chargyng them to paye to the said Margaret 
Florence and Alice and to euerych of them seuerelly .c. mark in money to their 
mariagez and after dide and left to the disposicion of his said exeeutours aboue 
all his dettes and other charges by them to be contented goodcs and catellx to 
the value of and more. Which goodes and catelx came to the handes of 
the said Laurence Miller after the deth of the said John Home his coexecutour 
And howe be it that your said besechers oft tymes sythen the deth of the said 
John Seyntleger and also after the deth of the said Alice, the whiche Alice 
dide affore the contentacion of the said .c. marc to her made for her part, 
haue requyred the saide Laurence to paye to the said Margaret and Florence 
and to either of them .c. marc and also .c. marc of the part of the said Alice 
accordyng to the wille afforsaid, yet that to do the said Laurence att al) 


tymes hath refused and yet doeth to the great hurt of your said besechers and 
agayne all right and good conscience. Please it your gracious lordship the 
premysses considered and howe your said besechers haue noo remedy by the 
cours of the comen lawe of this land to graunt a writte sub pena to be direct to 
the said Laurence commaundyng hym by the same to appere afFore your said 
lordship in the Chauncerye of our souerain lord the Kyng at a certayn day 
and under a certayne payne by your said lordship to be lymetted there to be 
examyned and ruled vppon and in the premyssez as right and conscience shall 
requyre for the loue of god and in wey of charite. 

Pie ' de ros' ("^"^^^^ Hore de London' gentilman. 
eg e pros Ieoyv^rous Swerenden de London' gentilman. 

Early Chancery Proceedings, Bd. lo, 287. 

At last we have the lady, as it were, clothed with a family. 
The statement of the Visitation of Gloucestershire that she was 
a St. Leger is confirmed ; she has a sister Brokeman ; she is 
not merely the widow of a Lord Clinton, but of John, Lord 
Clinton. Also we have a new date. 

There is considerable scope for ingenuity in dating these 
Early Chancery Proceedings. Each * Bill,' such as the above, 
is addressed to a chancellor by name, and seeing that prefixed 
to the volume there is a list of chancellors, it should be neces- 
sary only, having noted the chancellor required, to turn to this 
table, in order to discover the date of the document, at least 
within the limits of the particular chancellor's term of office. 
Unfortunately however in the case of ecclesiastical chancel- 
lors they succeeded one another not only in office but in their 
sees, and a second table is accordingly supplied, which, with 
delightful candour, points out that the documents in any given 
bundle are assignable to almost any date you please. Thus, 
Lady Clinton's ' Bill ' may have been addressed to John 
Stafford, Bishop of Bath and Wells, and chancellor in the 
years 143 1-2 to 1433, or, should you prefer, to Robert 
Stillington, bishop of the same see, and chancellor, with breaks, 
from 20 June, 1467, to, as it would seem, 20 September, 
1472. In practice some sort of exactitude is usually attainable. 
The addition of the bishop's Christian name sometimes helps, 
and we are seldom without some intrinsic clue. We know, 
for instance, that Lady Clinton's son and heir was born in or 
about 1469, and these proceedings, we may suppose, were 
instituted not long before or after that event, and we conclude 
that the Bill was addressed not to John Stafford but to Robert 
Stillington, Bishop of Bath and Wells, 



We may well rest content in most instances, if we can re- 
trieve merely the record of the fact ; the explanation escapes 
us. Every moment explanations are perishing, as the actors 
pass. ' The beautiful ' clings by way of explanation to the 
sisters Gunning, but of the fortunes of the Burrells, for in- 
stance, even a contemporary is at a loss to discover the spring. 
Thus a plain gentleman, who died and was buried at Ulcombe 
in Kent, in 1442, leaving his eldest son but twelve years old, 
not over rich, presumably, for his daughters' portions a quarter 
of a century later were still unpaid, is progenitor to all appear- 
ance of an amazing brood. 

I rely mainly on the late Mr. Wykeham Martin's History 
of Leeds Castle in identifying the father of Lady Clinton, and 
of Florence Brokeman, with John St. Leger of Ulcombe. I 
have not verified the numerous references there given, but the 
descent may, I think, be accepted as correct. Omitting details, 
John St. Leger of Ulcombe, sheriff of Kent in 143 1, died 
16 May, 1442, leaving issue, by Margery, daughter and heir 
of James Donet of Sileham, in Rainham, in the same county 
(brass at Rainham, 1409), five sons and three or possibly four 
daughters, namely (i) Ralph St. Leger, born in 1430, died 
1470, leaving issue, whose achievements occupy much space in 
the Dictionary of National Biography ; (2) Sir Thomas St. Leger, 
who by Anne his wife. Duchess of Exeter, sister of King 
Edward IV., is ancestor of the house of Manners, Dukes of 
Rutland ; this is the Sir Thomas Selynger mentioned in the 
escheat taken on the death of his sister. Lady Clinton ; (3) 
John St. Leger ; (4) Bartholomew St. Leger, who married a 
daughter of William Bourchier, Lord Fitzwarine ; and (5) 
James St. Leger, who married the Earl of Ormonde's 

So much for the sons, and a very remarkable record it is. 
Of the daughters, there is, first, Margaret, married (i) to 
Lord Clinton, (2) to Sir Walter Hungerford, with, appended as 
sole authority, a reference to the Visitation of Wilts, doubdess, 
though from another MS. to the entry which I have already 
quoted. In this description of Lady Clinton's marriages there 
seems to be a certain amount of inaccuracy, for there is no 
evidence that her husband Walter Hungerford was ever 
knighted, indeed from the terms of the escheat with which we 
began, it may be gathered that he was not, while her third 
marriage to Sir John Hevenyngham is ignored. I may add 


that in the St. Leger pedigree given by Berry, Lady Clinton 
does not occur at all. 

The second daughter, Florence St. Leger, is stated in Mr. 
Wykeham-Martin's pedigree to have married (i) John Clifford, 
(2) John Brockman, with references to the pedigrees of Lord 
Clifford of Ugbrooke, and of Brockman of Beachbro', in the 
Visitation of Essex. The two husbands* names are similarly 
given by Berry. It appears by a pedigree of Brockman, 
entered at the Visitation of Essex in 16 12 (Harleian Society's 
publications) that ' John Brokeman married Florence, daughter 
of St. Leger, esquire,' a statement exactly reproduced by 
Morant, under Witham, where the chief estate of the family 
lay. He adds, with much other information relating to the 
name, that there are inscriptions at Witham to John Broke- 
man, who died 22 August, 1500, and to Florence Brokeman, 
who died 18 March, 1 500-1 (Hist, of Essex^ ii. 108, 386). 
The previous match with Clifford is not mentioned here ; but 
in their pedigrees of the Lords Clifford of Chudleigh, in which 
parish Ugbrooke is situate, Collins and Edmondson are agreed 
that John Clifford of Kent, a second son, had issue three sons 
by Alice Gainsford, his first wife, and by his second wife, 
Florence daughter of John St. Leger, esquire, a son Thomas 
Clifford, of Borscombe, co. Wilts, and a daughter Anne, 
married to Robert Kemp. I have not however attempted to 
test the statement. 

The third, and only other, daughter mentioned by Mr. 
Wykeham Martin (omitted by Berry) is Isabel St. Leger, wife 
of Sir Thomas Melbourne. We are not entitled to say that 
because she is not mentioned in Lady Clinton's Bill therefore 
she never existed, but I have no knowledge of her otherwise. 

The fourth daughter, Alice St. Leger, we hear of only in 
Lady Clinton's Bill, and according to the terms of it she was 
then dead, leaving no issue, if indeed she were ever married. 

With all this we have not come much nearer to establish- 
ing Lady Clinton's claims, but before attacking the citadel, in 
other words the Clinton pedigree itself, it is well first to study 
the ground. We may now feel tolerably certain that Lady 
Clinton was herself from Kent. She married, secondly, a 
Wiltshireman, and she was dowered in Essex. With regard 
to the first point it is, I think, possible to suggest, that there 
was a certain connexion between the families of Clinton and 
Hungerford, while as for Clinton, the designation ' Clinton of 



Maxstoke/ which is in Warwickshire, draws attention away 
from the fact that the family was becoming distinctively 
Kentish. Maxstoke itself was sold in 1438, while the 
portion of the Saye inheritance which accrued to them in 
1404 lay largely in Kent, where they already possessed 
the lordship of Folkestone and much else. Therefore, if 
Margaret St. Leger married a Lord Clinton, she was marrying 
in her own county, while her second marriage was, as I sup- 
pose, determined by her first. It remains to account for her 
settlement in Essex. 

According to the escheat, a third of the manor of Stan- 
stede Mountfichet was settled upon her for life, and we turn 
to the History of Essex again for further information. As it 
happens, Morant's account of the place leaves much to be 
desired, and here, as elsewhere, it appears that a family of 
adven^y such as the Hungerfords, estated and resident else- 
where, is somewhat outside his scheme. He informs us how- 
ever of one all-important fact, that the manor of Stansted 
Hall in this parish had belonged to the family of Burnel (ii. 
577~8), and the subsequent Hungerford interest there is 
immediately explained. 

Few men have practised match-making, that most impor- 
tant of arts, more successfully than Walter, first Lord Hunger- 
ford. By the heiress of Peverell he had three sons. Of the 
eldest the accounts seem to me unsatisfactory, for it is difficult 
to believe, that with such a father, he was living unmarried as 
late as 1435, when according to the notice of his father in the 
Dictionary of National Biography he was in the retinue of the 
Duke of Bedford. The second son Robert, who in the end 
succeeded his father, was at that date a married man of some 
fifteen years' standing, while the third son, Edmund Hunger- 
ford, with whom we are particularly concerned, had been pro- 
vided with a wife, seven years of age, or thereabouts, in 141 6. 
This little maid was Margery Burnell, reputed one of the 
greatest heiresses in England. The king himself had inter- 
vened to promote the match, which had cost Sir Walter Hun- 
gerford dear, as appears by the following letters patent, which 
Sir Walter, to make all safe, was at the pains to procure : — 

\XT Tj Rex omnibus ad quos &c. Salutem. Sciatis 

pro Waltero Hungerford , ^ ^ . j-i . ^ £j r 

Chivaler quod cum ut accepimus dilectus et ndelis 

noster Walterus Hungerford chivaler per 
auxilium et mediacionem literarum nostrarum cum Hugone domino de 


Burnell barganizaverit maritagium Margerie unius filiarum et heredum Edwardi 
iilii prefati Domini de Burnell et unius heredum apparencium predicti Hugonis 
que quidem Margaria infra etatem Edmundo filio prefati Walteri ad suos cus- 
tus mille librarum iam disponsata existit. idemque Walterus periculum et 
deperditum in hac parte metuat sibi forsan evenire eo quod quedam terrar- 
um et tenementorum de quibus prefatus Edwardus tempore mortis sue fuit 
seisitus que predicte Margerie et duabus sororibus suis ut filiabus et heredibus 
ipsius Edwardi descenderunt de nobis tenentur in capite per quod seu 
ratione aliorum tenementorum que eis post mortem predictorum Hugonis et 
Edwardi exnunc descendere poterunt dicta sponsalia perturbari valeant. 

Nos considerantes premissa et ad supplicacionem prefati Walteri concessi- 
mus pro nobis et heredibus nostris quantum in nobis est, quod dicta sponsalia 
inter predictum Edmundum et prefatam Margeriam sint et pro perpetuo con- 
tinuentur iuxta legem ecclesiasticam absque impeticione impedimento aut 
gravamine nostri vel heredum nostrorum aliquali. Et insuper prefato Waltero 
concedimus ratificamus et confirmamus pro nobis et dictis heredibus nostris 
maritagium et custodiam persone dicte Margerie ac custodiam. dictorum 
terrarum et tenementorum que sibi sic descenderunt et quicquid ad nos vel 
heredes nostros pertinet seu pertinere poterit occasione custodie et maritagii 
predictorum. Ita quod ipse inde habeat adeo liberam et plenam disposicionem 
ac proficuum et gubernacionem tam custodie et maritagii ejusdem Margerie 
singulis temporibus quam omnium terrarum et tenementorum cum Domino 
de Burnell cum maritagio illo barganizatorum et eciam que eidem Margerie 
ut predictum est descenderunt sicut nos ea habere deberemus pretextu aliquo- 
rum terrarum et tenementorum supradictorum in casa quo ea in manibus 
nostris propriis existerent aliquo titulo qui pro nobis aut heredibus nostris in 
hoc parte reperitur seu reperiri poterit aut eo quod de valore dictorum marita- 
gii terrarum et tenementorum aceciam de donis et concessionibus prefato 
Waltero per nos ac progenitores predecessores et antecessores nostros factis in 
presentibus Uteris expressa non fit mencio juxta formam statutorum ante hec 
tempora in hoc parte editorum non obstante, In cujus &c. Teste Rege apud 
Westmonasterium. viij. die Novembris [141 6]. 

Pat. Roll Hen. V.m. 13. 

The honest word ' barganizavit ' expresses the essence of 
match-making ; while as to the nature of the bargain we have 
the fullest evidence. 

Sir Edward Burnell, Margery's father, had died 23 Sep- 
tember, the Feast of St. Tecla the Virgin, 141 5, seised in fee 
tail, to himself and the heirs of his body, by the gift of his 
father, Hugh, Lord Burnell, of the manors and advowsons of 
Thurning and Billingford, and of the manor of East Riston, 
all in the county of Norfolk. There can be no doubt, I think, 
that Sir Edward Burnell had been thrice married, but of the 
names of his wives there does not appear to be any rehable 
evidence, though the name of one is given as Alice, daughter 
of the Lord Strange. By the first wife he had a daughter 
Joyce, born about 1396, who at the time of his death was the 





wife of Thomas Erdynton, the younger ; his other two 
daughters, I should suppose by a different mother, were born 
ten years later, namely Katharine in 1407-8, and Margery in 
14 10- 1, and were both unmarried when he died. His third 
wife Elizabeth, who survived him, and by whom, it is ex- 
pressly mentioned, he had no issue, was married to him before 
18 June, 141 5, when the manors of East and West Ham, etc., 
CO. Essex, were settled on her. She remarried with Sir Thomas 
Cristou and died, many years later, 3 April, 1440, seised, not 
of the manors of East and West Ham, for everything in the 
odd story we have embarked on got changed into something 
else, but of the manor of Holond, another Burnell fee in the 
same county, which she held for the term of her life by the 
demise of Philip Morgan, Bishop of Ely, formerly of Wor- 
cester, and others, with reversion to James, Earl of Ormonde, 
and others ; the said earl having married Elizabeth Beauchamp, 
daughter of Joan, Lady Bergavenny, of whom, and her inter- 
meddling in the Burnell inheritance, we shall presently hear 

The eagerness of Sir Walter Hungerford to secure the 
child Margery for his son was not excited by a mere matter of 
a third share of three manors in Norfolk, the sum total of Sir 
Edward BurnelFs possessions. So long as Sir Edward lived 
there had always been the possibility of a male heir to the 
great Burnell estates ; once he was dead his daughters became 
inevitably their grandfather's inheritors. 

The remaining years of Hugh, Lord BurnelFs, life were 
busy with settlements. A greater man than Sir Walter Hun- 
gerford, and a more fortunate one, intervened. The backbone 
of the Burnell estates was in Shropshire and Staffordshire. 
For these lands John Talbot de Furnival, afterwards first Earl 
of Shrewsbury, was suitor, on behalf of his son John. The 
bargain was struck, and by charter dated at Burnell, 22 June, 
141 6, a long list of manors was settled on Hugh, Lord Bur- 
nell, knight. Lord of Weolegh, for his life, with remainder to 
John Talbot, knight. Lord de Fournyvale, John Talbot, his 
son, and Katharine, one of the daughters and heirs of Edward 
Burnell, knight, and the heirs of the bodies of the said John 
and Katharine, with remainder, in default, after the death of 
the said John, Lord Furnival, to the right heirs of Hugh. 
Still there was plenty left for Sir Walter. Hugh, Lord Bur- 
nell, proceeded to give manors in eight counties to Robert 


Rikedon of Witham, Robert Darcy of Maldon, and others, 
who by their writing, dated, in respect to certain of the manors 
in Essex, 12 July, 141 6, that is to say shortly after the con- 
clusion of the separate arrangement with Lord Furnival, gave 
all these lands to Hugh for life, with remainder to Walter 
Hungerford, knight, Edmund Hungerford, Walter's son, and 
Margery, daughter and one of the heirs of Edward Burnell, 
knight, and the heirs of the bodies of the said Edmund and 
Margery, with remainder in default, after the death of Walter, 
Edmund and Margery, to the right heirs of Hugh. The 
estate thus secured to the Hungerfords consisted of, in Surrey, 
the manor of Rotherhithe (worth 10 marks) and the manor of 
Hatcham (worth 10 marks) ; in Oxfordshire, the manor of 
RoUright (worth 10 marks) ; in Gloucestershire, the manor 
and advowson of Little Rissington (worth 10 marks) ; in 
Bristol, four messuages, six shops, three cellars and ;^I3 is. 6d. 
rent ; in Somerset, the manor of Compton Dando (worth 6 
marks) ; in Wiltshire, the manor and advowson of Great 
Cheverell (worth 6 marks) and a fee farm rent of 30 marks 
from Biddestone ; in Worcestershire, the manor of Suckley 
(worth 20 marks) ; and in Essex, the manor of Stanstede 
Montfichet, of which we have heard already as in dower to 
Lady Clinton, the manor of Waltham Powers, the manor ot 
Walkfare, and the manor of Latchingdon, to which were added 
the manors of East and West Ham and Borham, subject to 
the life estate of Elizabeth, Edward BurnelFs widow. I think 
that very possibly the Norfolk manors, of which Sir Edward 
Burnell had died seised, were also included in the bargain, for 
it was found on the death of John, Duke of Bedford, in 1436, 
that two fees were held of the duke in Thirning, one of these 
Norfolk manors, by Edmund Hungerford, knight. 

Hugh, Lord Burnell, was an old man when he made the 
settlement. Sir Walter Hungerford had not long to wait. 
On 27 November, 1420, Lord Burnell died, and it was duly 
found that Joyce, wife of Thomas Erdyngton, the younger, 
aged twenty-four and more ; Katharine Burnell, aged fourteen 
and more ; and Margery, the wife of Edmund Hungerford, 
aged eleven and more, were his cousins and heirs, namely the 
daughters of Sir Edward Burnell, his son. The marriage 
arranged between Katharine Burnell and John Talbot, the 
younger, you will notice, had not yet taken effect. 

Sir Walter Hungerford thereupon, we may suppose, 



entered on possession. He is returned for instance, in 1428, 
as holding half a knight's fee in Latchingdon. Possibly as 
representing part of the 1,000 which he states the marriage 
to have cost him, or perhaps over and above that sum, he had 
settled the manors of Down Ampney, co. Gloucester, and the 
manors of Stoke by Bedwin, etc., co. Wilts, on the young 
couple. On i May, 1423, he had licence to settle the manor 
and hundred of Chippenham, etc., which he was purchasing of 
Hales and Bessyl, on himself and others, with remainder to 
the heirs male of his son Edmund, with remainder in default 
to his own heirs. Oddly enough, this settlement was never 
effected ; and on 16 November, 1424, he surrendered the 
former letters patent, and obtained leave to settle this fine 
estate on himself and his heirs, with no mention at all of 
Edmund. The alteration was typical of the altered prospects, 
in other respects, of Edmund Hungerford, and of the future 
house of Down Ampney descended from him ; it was also, in 
all probability, the direct consequence of a fact that had 
emerged. Sir Walter Hungerford was no longer under any 
obligation to balance his daughter-in-law's dowry by a grand 
settlement on his own side, and caution, or luck, had served 
Lord Fur nival well, when he deferred the marriage between 
his son and Katharine Burnell the other coheir. The awkward 
fact, discovered in Sir Walter's case too late, was, that all Lord 
Burnell's settlements were null and void. He possessed, so 
far as I am aware, not a single acre of which he was free to 

Here we trench on a question of law, and it is well to 
walk warily, but the case can be stated simply enough. The 
moral question, which remains I am afraid insoluble, is even 
more interesting. Did Lord Burnell know ? I am convinced 
that he did ; if he was by any possibility unaware of the nature 
of his tenure of the Burnell estates, he could have been under 
no misapprehension as to his exact title to the inheritance of 
his deceased wife ; but with part of this he attempted to deal 
no less fraudulently. He had been three times married. His 
first wife, the mother of his child, or children, is stated to 
have been Philippe de la Pole, daughter of the second Earl of 
Suffolk. She was dead, and he had remarried, before June, 
1386, when, with Joice, Lady Botetourt, his second wife, he 
joined in a settlement of the Botetourt estates. A fine was 
levied between Roger Caumpden, clerk, John Hyde and Ed- 


ward Acton, querents, and Hugh and Joice, deforciants, of the 
manors of Bordesley, co. Warwick, Honesworth, Meere and 
Clent, CO. Stafford, Lynford and Newport Pagnell, co. Bucks, 
and the castle of Weoley and the manors of Northfield, Grade- 
ley and Oldeswyneford, co. Worcester, to the said Hugh and 
Joice, in tail, with remainder in default to her heirs ; with a 
special provision touching the manors of Little Lynford and 
Newport Pagnell, which Sir Thomas Harcourt and Maud his 
wife then held for Maud's life, with reversion expectant to the 
said Joice, that if Hugh survived her, and was disturbed by 
her heirs in his quiet enjoyment of the castle of Weoley, etc., 
the said two Buckinghamshire manors should remain to his 

So matters continued for some thirty years. Joice died on 
New Year's Day, 1406-7. Hugh thereupon married his third 
wife, Joan Devereux, the widow of Walter, Lord Fitz Walter, 
who had died 16 May, 1406. She had the king's licence, 
29 January, 1407-8, to marry whom she pleased, and a writ 
was directed to the escheator of Lincolnshire to assign dower 
to Hugh Burnell who married the said Joan, and to the said 
Joan, from her late husband's lands. The order to assign 
dow^r to Hugh and Joan was renewed 29 January, 1408-9, 
but she died shortly afterwards, on Friday before the Feast 
of the Ascension, that is to say, 10 May, 1409. I should 
like to suppose that by this third wife he had a daughter 
Mary. I have met with a lady described as his daughter, 
who, by the dates of her career, could not well have been 
his child by his first wife, but I do not find that he en- 
joyed any portion of the Devereux estates by the curtesy, 
as, in this case, he would have done. In 141 5 he lost his 
only son. Sir Edward Burnell, and 141 6, as we have already 
seen, he settled the bulk of his estates on that son's daughters, 
to the exclusion however of the eldest, the wife of Thomas 
Erdynton, the younger ; she is mentioned as one of his co- 
heirs, but nowhere else is she alluded to in the series of in- 
quisitions taken upon his death. The reason of this exclusion, 
I would suggest, was that she was already married, and was 
accordingly not marketable. There was no money to be made 
in a bargain for her hand, and money, apparently, Hugh Lord 
Burnell wanted, and wanted for a purpose as strange as every- 
thing else in this affair. 

He was born in 1 347, and was now close on seventy years 



of age. There was also a great lady, Joan, daughter and co- 
heir of the Earl of Arundel, the widow of William Beauchamp, 
Lord Bergavenny (he had died 8 May, 141 1), born in 1375, 
and therefore at this time aged about forty. Whether they 
proposed to marry one another, or what the bond between them 
was, I have failed to find out ; but to benefit her was, it seems, 
the main preoccupation of the last years of his life. By his 
will, which I have not seen, he gave her everything, so it is 
stated ; while in her own will, made fifteen years after his 
death, she endows the Friars Preachers of Hereford ' perpetu- 
ally to sing for my lord my husband, my lord my father, my 
lady my mother, and me, and Sir Hugh Burnel, knight, and 
all my good doers, and all Christian souls,' and again directs 
that five priests shall ' sing for me for twenty winters, for my 
lord my father, my lady my mother, my husband, my son 
Richard, earl of Worcester, Sir Hugh Burnell, knight, and all 
my good doers, and all Christian souls.' 

Such charity at her hands Lord Burnell had well earned. 
By fine in October, 141 7, he gave to 'Joan, late the wife of 
William de Beauchamp of Bergavenny, Philip Morgon, now 
(1420) bishop of Worcester,' and others, the manors of Swave- 
sey and Fulborn, co. Cambridge, the manor of Picheford, co. 
Salop, the manor of Assheby la Zouche, co. Leicester, and the 
manor of Haselbeche, co. Northampton, all of his own inheri- 
tance ; by fines in October, 141 7, and 3 November, 141 9, 
she bought the reversions of two-thirds, from the heirs of 
Joyce, Lady Burnell, of the castle of Weoley, the manor of 
Northfield, Cradeley and Oldeswynford, co. Worcester, in 
which, as we have seen, he had a life estate, and he released 
his right to her ; and finally he made over to her, and her 
feoflFees, another portion of his late wife's inheritance, of 
which she had not purchased the reversion, namely, those 
manors of Little Lynford and Newport Pagnell, which in a 
certain event, that had evidently not occurred, were limited, 
lawfully or unlawfully, to descend to his heirs to the exclusion 
of Joyce's. In this last case one is pleased to know that the 
attempted iniquity missed its mark. Charters Nos. 384 and 
721 in Madox' Formulare show Adam de Peshale and Joice 
his wife, who were among the true heirs of the Botetourt 
inheritance, selling a moiety of the manors of Lynford and 
Newport Pagnell. 

1 think we may take it, then, that Hugh, Lord Burnell, 


had an infatuation for Lady Bergavenny, and that he was a 
man capable of endeavouring to dispose of other people's in- 
heritances. The particular trap which he set for Lord Fur- 
nival and Sir Walter Hungerford, and into which Sir Walter 
walked, is easily explained. 

What Hugh, Lord Burnell, represented in the world was 
the Burnell estates. He was personally distinguished, a 
Knight of the Garter, like most of the other actors, or their 
husbands, as it happens, for we are moving in the best society ; 
but it was the Burnell estates which made a great man of him. 
Originally, it is stated, accumulated by Bishop Burnell of Bath 
and Wells, they descended to Philip Burnell, the bishop's 
nephew, who left issue a son Edward and a daughter Maud. 
Edward died in 13 15, without issue, and Maud became 
possessed of this immense inheritance in fee. She was then 
aged twenty-four or five, and a widow, with one little boy, sole 
heir to his father John, Lord Lovell. She took for her second 
husband John de Haudlo, by whom she had a son, Nicholas de 
Haudlo, afterwards known as Nicholas Burnell, to whom 
she gave the greater part of her inheritance, to the ex- 
clusion of the son of her first marriage, John Lovell. This 
Nicholas Burnell, her son, who had summons to Parliament 
from 1350 on, died 19 January, 1382-3, seised, according to 
the inquisitions taken after his death, of all the Burnell estates 
in his demesne as of fee, leaving Hugh, his son and heir, a 
knight, then aged thirty-six and more. Thus, you will see, 
if Sir Walter Hungerford had employed a friend in the Chan- 
cery to look this inquisition up, so as to be on the safe side, he 
would have found all quite regular. Hugh, Lord Burnell, 
inherited an estate in fee simple, and was free to dispose. But 
supposing Sir Walter had taken his inquiries a little further 
back, he would have learned more. Obviously we cannot in- 
vestigate the title of all these lands, but we can trace the history 
of one holding, and what is true of that one is, as a matter of 
fact, true of them all. One of the manors which Hugh, Lord 
Burnell, assigned to Sir Walter Hungerford was Compton 
Dando in Somerset, and the whole history is told in four fines 
by which the manor was passed. In 131 1 a fine was levied of 
it (with lands in Norfolk and Salop) to Edward Burnell and 
Alyna, his wife, and Edward's heirs. Edward died, as we 
have said, without issue. Alyna survived till 1363, and 
accordingly in the fines which follow it is the reversion of the 



manor, expectant on her decease, that is dealt with. In 1324 
a fine was levied of the reversion by John de Haudlo, and 
Maud his wife, sister and heir of Edward, to Robert de 
Haudlo, clerk. In 1325 a fine was levied of the reversion 
(with lands in Worcestershire, Warwickshire, Gloucestershire, 
Kent and Norfolk) by Robert de Haudlo, clerk, to John de 
Haudlo and Maud his wife, and the heirs male of their bodies, 
with remainder in default to the right heirs of Maud. In 1340 
a fine was levied of the reversion (with lands in Norfolk, 
Gloucestershire and Warwickshire) by John de Haudlo to 
GeoflFrey de Scardebergh, parson of Onebury, and Thomas 
Asselot, parson of Wolstanton, who gave the reversion, etc., 
back to John de Haudlo, with remainder to Nicholas, John*s 
son, and the heirs of Nicholas for ever. 

Always supposingjthat there was an estate vested in Sir John 
de Haudlo, enabling him to levy a fine of the land at all, which 
appears doubtful, the effect of the fine of 1340 would be two- 
fold : (i) in the event of failure of issue of Maud Burnell by 
her first husband, John Lovell, to carry the land to the heir 
general, as opposed to the heir male, of her son, Nicholas 
Burnell ; (2) in the event, which occurred (viz. of failure of 
male issue to Nicholas, the issue of Maud and John Lovell 
persisting), to carry the land to Nicholas' heir general, if no 
claimi to it was advanced within due time by the heir, or heirs, of 
Maud and John Lovell, that is to say within a year and a day, 
the fine having been levied prior to the Statute of 34 Edward 
III. cap. 13, which took away 'all such puissance' in a fine. 

It is part of the irony of the situation that had Nicholas 
male issue persisted another fifty years, the decision in what we 
must now call Talcarne's case would have supplied the remedy ; 
and we should probably not be far out in ascribing to the 
scandal excited by this, the Burnell case, an increased deter- 
mination in men's minds to arrive at some such solution of the 

What we may be quite certain of is, that the Lovell claim 
was advanced immediately on the death of Hugh, Lord Bur- 
nell, and that it proved good. An examination of the later 
Lovell inquisitions post mortem shows that family in posses- 
sion of the whole of the Shropshire estates of the Burnells, and 
of the manors of Rotherhithe, co. Surrey, of Little Rissington 
CO. Gloucester, and of Boreham Magna, Waltham Parva, alia 
Powers, and Walkfar, whigh latter had, as we have seen, all 


been settled by Lord Hugh on his granddaughter Margery 
Hungerford. At the same time there are suggestions of a 
compromise. It certainly appears by the institutions to the 
living of Great Cheverell in Wiltshire, that this manor was 
allotted to Hungerford, and similarly it is stated, though not 
precisely, in Habington s Survey^ that Suckley in Worcester- 
shire was in the possession of Hungerfords at a later date, 
both of which manors were included in Lord Hugh's settle- 
ment. They do not appear however, so far as I can find, in 
the extant inquisitions taken on the deaths of Sir Edmund 
Hungerford and Margery his wife. It appears from these 
returns that he died either 26 March, which is probably 
correct, or 26 May, 1484, and that she died either 20 
April, which is probably correct, or 27 March, i486. It 
was further found by the jurors that Walter Hungerford, 
knight. Lord of Heytesbury and Homet, being seised in fee 
of the manors of Berton [and] Jenkynscourte, and six virgates 
of land in Stratton St. Margaret, and of the manor of Stoke by 
Bedwin, co. Wilts, gave them to the said Edmund and the 
heirs male of his body ; and that being seised of the manor 
of Down Ampney and of a toft and two carucates of land in 
Wyke by Hampton Meysy, co. Gloucester, in fee, he gave 
them to the said Edmund and Margery his wife, to them and 
the heirs male of Edmund. This probably represents the full 
settlement made by Walter, Lord Hungerford, on his younger 
son. What remains represents, always excluding Great 
Cheverell, Suckley and Compton Dando, which are not defin- 
itely traced, the fraction of the Burnell inheritance which 
accrued to Margery. The terms of the findings are remark- 
able. They state that William, Lord Lovell, Burnell and 
Holland, being seised of the manors of Estham Burnell, 
Westham Burnell, Hellehous and Stansted Mountfichet, in fee, 
gave them to the said Edmund Hungerford, knight, and 
Margery his wife, to them and the heirs of the said Edmund 
and Margery issuing, that they were seised thereof accordingly 
in fee tail, that Edmund died so seised, that Margery sur- 
vived, and is still living so seised ; the manors are worth ^40 
and are held of Francis, Lord Lovell, William's cousm and 
heir. Again, on Margery's death, it is found that William, 
Lord Lovell, as before, gave the manors of Estham, Westham, 
and Hilhowse, etc. — the manor of Stansted Mountfichet being 
in this return omitted, I presume because it had, in the inter- 



val, been settled on Walter Hungerford and Lady Clinton. 
The last of these inquisitions informs us that William, Lord 
Lovell, as before, gave the manor of Rowlright, co. Oxford, to 
Edmund and Margery and the heirs of their bodies, to hold of 
him and his heirs by fealty only. 

It is thus abundantly clear that in the compromise finally 
arrived at — and the settlement of the dispute was evidently 
deferred, for William only inherited in 14 14, and was then 
four years under age — the Lovell title to the manors in dispute 
was unreservedly recognized. That this was the case is put in, 
if possible, a clearer light by the settlement of the claims of 
Katharine Burnell, Margery's sister. We have seen that she 
was promised to Lord Furnival's son, and that the match was 
broken o£F. It is pleasant to know that she found a husband, 
and that some provision was made for her. She married, some 
time before 1430, when her son was born, a middle-aged 
widower of distinction, Sir John RadclifF, seneschal of Aqui- 
taine, late constable of Bordeaux, Knight of the Garter in 1429. 
His first wife, Cecily Harlyng, widow, born Mortimer, was 
co-heiress to her father. She inherited the manor of Attle- 
borough, CO. Norfolk, and the manors of Newnham, then and 
now part of the borough of Cambridge, and Foxton, co. Cam- 
bridge. The two latter manors he enjoyed for his life, by the 
grant of Thomas, Bishop of Durham, James de Strangways, 
and William Alyngton, the feoffees, with reversion to Sir Robert 
Harlyng, his stepson, and on his death they actually reverted 
to Anne Chamberleyn, Sir Robert's daughter and heir, even- 
tually passing to the descendants of Sir Robert's sister, Anne's 
aunt. The manor of Attleborough, on the other hand, he 
diverted from his wife's heirs to his own, for by thejr charter 
indented, dated 24 May, 1431, the Bishop of Durham and his 
co-feoffees granted it to him by the name of Mortymers manor 
of Attilburgh, to hold to him and the heirs of his body, to 
whom it duly descended accordingly, thereby occasioning some 
trouble when the Radcliff pedigree was compiled. 

Having in this way become a considerable landowner, in 
addition to his personal distinction. Sir John RadclifF married 
Katharine Burnell. Possibly it was a speculative match ; at any 
rate it was not till ten years later that Katharine's share in 
the Burnell estates was secured to her. Then by his charters, 
dated 8 December, 1439, J^ly> ^440) WiUiam, Lord 

Lovell, Burnell and de Holand, granted to Sir John RadclifF 


and Katharine his wife, and the heirs of their bodies (i) the 
manors of Southmer and Docking, and (2) the manors of 
Riston, Thurning and Billingford, all in the county of Nor- 
folk, of which the said William was seised in fee. As though 
to accentuate his title. Lord Lovell gives Docking, which I 
believe was part of the ancient inheritance of Lovell, and 
formed no part of the Burnell inheritance ; while again his 
title to Thurning, etc., is fully confessed, and the recognition 
in this case is particularly interesting, for it was at Thurning 
that Edward, Lord Burnell, died in 13 1 5, it was Thurning, etc., 
that Hugh, Lord Burnell, had given to Sir Edward Burnell, 
Katharine's father, and it was presumably at Thurning that 
Katharine herself was born and bred. 

We have thus ascertained how it came about that Walter 
Hungerford, esquire, the husband of Lady Clinton, was con- 
nected with Essex, and how the manor of Stanstede Mount- 
fichet in particular, or rather a third of it, came to be settled 
on her for life, with remainder to Walter's son, who was also 
hers. For Walter Hungerford, esquire, was the second son 
of Sir Edmund Hungerford and Margery Burnel his wife. 

Lady Clinton's third venture was with Sir John Hevening- 
ham, who, like herself, had been twice previously married. 
His first wife is stated to have been Alice, daughter of Sir 
John Savile, by whom he had a son John, who succeeded him, 
being fifty years old or more at his father's death. He 
married secondly a considerable heiress, Alice Bruyn, co-heir 
with her sister Lady Brandon, of Sir Henry Bruyn. By her 
he had a son George. He married thirdly Lady Clinton, and 
himself died 20 March, 1498-9, having survived Lady Clinton 
a month over three years. 

This completes the first stage of the enquiry ; and we may 
proceed, feeling tolerably certain as to the parentage of our 
lady, and as to the identity of two at any rate of her husbands, 
to place her, if possible, in the Clinton pedigree. The princi- 
pal fact we have to go by is the birth of her son Nicholas 
Hungerford, who was found to be twenty-seven years old in 
1495-6, who was born, that is to say, about 1469. It follows 
that the John, Lord Clinton, whom we know by the Chancery 
proceedings to have been her previous husband, must have 
died at some convenient date prior to that event. Our require- 
ments are met by John, usually reckoned as fifth, but more 
correctly, it would seem, as fourth Lord Clinton of Maxstoke, 

t84 the ancestor 

who is stated to have died 24 September, 1464, being then 
aged about fifty-four. Our satisfaction however is diminished 
when we find that this Lord Clinton had married a totally 
different lady, who moreover survived him. Before looking 
elsewhere, or before deciding on a separation and a scandal, it 
may be as well to apply the usual simple tests, which for such 
inquiries as we are engaged upon consist merely in verifying 
the references given by the great Dugdale, fixing the dates 
with the assistance of the late Mr. Bond's invaluable Hand- 
book^ and doing sums in simple arithmetic. 

The wife, then, assigned to John, Lord Clinton, is 
Elizabeth, daughter of Richard Fienes, Lord Dacre of the 
South, and she is stated to have been living as his widow on 
3 December, 1485. I presume that this date refers to the will 
of the suojure Lady Dacre, widow of Richard, Lord Dacre, a 
brief abstract of which is printed in ^estamenta VetustUy 
dated 13 October, 1485, and proved 14 June, 1485. By this 
will Lady Dacre gives 'to Elizabeth, Lady Clinton, and 
Thomas Fynes, my son and daughter, all my chattels.' This 
seems conclusive, and we have only to add that the marriage 
proved fruitful, her son and heir by John, Lord Clinton, 
another John, being aged thirty at his father's death in 1464. 
That is to say. Lady Dacre's grandson was born in 1434 or 
thereabouts. Lady Dacre herself was born in 1433, and thus 
became a grandmother in the following year, which even in 
the fifteenth century was not possible. 

Trouble, genealogically, I have noticed usually follows 
when John to John succeeds ; and the Clinton pedigree for 
two and half centuries consists of six Johns and two Williams. 
That a solution of the difficulty is to be found in this direction 
is moreover suggested by the kinship existing between the 
families of Clinton and Fienes : — 

Geoffrey de Say 


John de Clinton = Idonea Toan = William Fienes 

S r' 

William William 

I I 

William Roger 

I . .1 

John, died 1464 Richard, Lord Dacre 

John de Clinton = Elizabeth Fienes 


That is to say, Elizabeth, Lady Dacre's daughter, did indeed 
marry a Lord Clinton, not however the John, Lord Clinton, 
who died in 1464, but his son. 

The inconvenience is obvious ; for we are obliged to 
tamper with another generation of the Clinton pedigree. 
John the younger is already, in the peerages, provided with a 
wife, namely Anne, daughter of Sir Humphrey Stafford. The 
little I know about him is soon stated. He succeeded his 
father, as mentioned above in 1464, being then aged thirty or 
more, and it appears accordingly that he was born about 1434, 
when his father was about twenty-four years old. He had a 
general pardon, 9 August, 147 1, as 'John Clynton, of the 
town of Calais, lord de Clynton and Say, alias lord de 
Clynton, of Folkeston, co. Kent.* A commission was directed 
to inquire, 31 January, 1483-4, whether the servants of John, 
Lord Clinton, had seized a ship of Hamburg, near Dover, and 
taken her into Winchelsea, as though he practised piracy 
from Folkestone. His wife, Elizabeth Fienes, was living 13 
October, 1485, when she is a legatee, as mentioned above, in 
her mother's will. She must have been a young bride, for her 
mother Lady Dacre was born in 1433, and her son by Lord 
Clinton was born, as we shall shortly see, in 1471. On 6 
November, 1484, he demised his manors and lands in 
Warwickshire and Staffordshire to one William Leycroft for 
the term of seven years, and by deed dated 6 February, 
1487-8, gave all his said manors in Warwickshire to the Earl 
of Arundel, and others ' to the use of his wife the Lady Anne 
Clynton ' for her life. About three weeks later, on 29 
February, 1487-8, he died, leaving a son John Clinton, aged 
seventeen and more, his son and heir. The settlement on the 
wife Anne suggests that they had been recently married, and I 
have very little doubt that his first wife Elizabeth Fienes died 
shortly after the date of her mother's will, and that he re- 
married with Anne. Whether this Anne was a daughter of Sir 
Humphrey Stafford, I cannot tell ; but it is clear that she was 
not the mother of his children. From all this it plainly 
appears that John, Lord Clinton, who died in 1464, did not 
marry Elizabeth Dacre ; that he had issue, born when he was 
a young man by some wife whose name we do not know ; and 
we may feel pretty confident that he married secondly a lady 
named Margaret St. Leger, whose subsequent matrimonial 
career we have already traced. 



The Clinton Pedigree 

In spite of the alterations suggested elsewhere in the pedigree 
of the Lords Clinton, the main facts of their descent are set out 
with a fair approach to accuracy in the received accounts of the 
family ; nor is this surprising when it is considered that both 
as connected with the county of Warwick, and as receiving 
summons to parliament, they came under the notice of Sir 
William Dugdale. Always prompted by a desire to do 
justice to Lady Clinton, I have tried to satisfy myself as to the 
facts, and while there is nothing very new in the result, there 
are a few points to which it may be interesting to call attention. 
I propose, as briefly as possible, to test the dates, and to state 
the evidence for the marriages of a limited number of the 
male heirs of the race. The first two generations I take from 
the pedigree in Dugdale's Warwickshire^ the remainder from 
that indispensable synopsis the Complete Peerage. 

The early possessions of this branch of the Clinton family 
consisted of Coleshill, Amington and Maxstoke, co. Warwick, 
and of Lydiard Millicent, co. Wilts. How Lydiard was 
acquired by them I do not at present know, but it was held 
under the Earls of Warwick. 

Coleshill was given to Osbert de Clinton (L), who obtained 
Amington by his marriage with Margaret, daughter of William, 
of Hatton, and granddaughter of Hugh, son of Richard, the 
founder of Wroxale Priory. That the Clintons descended 
from her, we know by an order touching the priory, entered on 
the Close Roll, dated 13 November, 1325, which recites that 
the king learned by inquisition that it was founded by Hugh, 
son of Richard, and is now of the patronage of John de 
Clinton of Maxstoke, kinsman and heir of Hugh. By 
Margaret, who was twice married, it is stated, after his death, 
Osbert de Clinton (I.) had issue :— 

Osbert de Clinton (H.), who in Michaelmas term, 2 John 
(1200), granted to Margaret de Clinton a third part of the 
wood of Coleshill as her dower. He married a wife Elysant, 
who survived him, presumably the mother of his son and 
heir : — 

Thomas de Clinton (III.). He succeeded his father in 
1222, and there are two consecutive entries, of 26 and 27 
November, on the Close Roll in that year, which relate to him. 
The first is an order to the sheriff of Warwick to put William 


Briwer in seisin of a knight's fee in Coleshill, which Osbert 
de Clintun held of him, * non obstante eo quod Jilius et heres 
ipsius Osberti miles f actus est ut dicitur' The case was 
governed by the clause of ' Magna Carta,' commented on by 
Selden {titles of Honour^ ed. 1672, p. 653), ^ Si hares infra 
atatem fiat mileSy nichilominus terra remaneat in custodia 
dominorum suorum usque ad atatem xxi annorum,' but at what 
age, or rather at how early an age knighthood could be taken 
up I do not know, and in this instance should particularly 
like to know. If he was then sixteen, and it seems hazardous 
to suggest that he was less, we get 1206 for the year of his 
birth. He survived till 1278, if I have correctly read the 
evidences which follow, thus approving himself in every way 
the vigorous progenitor of a race with male representatives at 
the present time, after a continued and conscious existence of 
close upon seven centuries from his first appearance in the 

The second entry, of 27 November, on the Close Roll of 
1222, is an order to the Treasurer to deliver 100 marks to 
William Briwer, for which William de Cantilupe is to answer, 
inasmuch as Briwer had sold him for that sum the wardship 
of the land and heir of Osbert de Clinton. This was not a 
transaction pro hac vice, so to speak, but an out and out sale. 
The over-lordship of Coleshill and its possessors was thereby 
permanently transferred, as we shall see by repeated instances, 
to Cantilupe and his heirs the Zouches. 

Whatever the exact date of his birth, in 1233 Thomas de 
Clinton was of full age. By the fine of this date, which follows, 
he assigns land in Coleshill, formerly held by Margery, his 
grandmother, then deceased, to his father's widow ; that is to 
say, to his own mother, presumably, in dower : — 

. ^ Hec est finalis concordia facta in curia domini regis 

3 pn 7 ay, apud Westmonasterium a die Pasche in quinque septi- 
^^^^ manas anno regni regis Henrici filii regis Johannis septi- 

modecimo coram Thoma de Muleton. Roberto de Lexinton. Willelmo 
de Eboraco et Radulfo de Norwico justiciariis et aliis domini regis fidelibus tunc 
ibi presentibus Inter Elysaunt que fuit uxor Osberti de Clinton petentem et 
Thomam de Clinton tenentem de tercia parte tercie partis feodi unius militis 
cum pertinenciis in Coleshull et Halgton. scilicet de tota terra cum pertinen- 
ciis quam Margeria de Clinton aliquando tenuit in dote in eisdem villis de dono 
Osberti de Clinton quondam viri sui et de una virgata terra quam Alanus pre- 
positus tenuit in Coleshull. Quam terciam partem eadem Elysaunt clamabat 
esse de racionabili dote sua que earn contingit de libero tenemento quod fuit 



predict! Osberti quondam viri sui in eisdem villis. Et unde placitum fuit inter 
eos in eadem curia. Scilicet quod predictus Thomas concessit predicte Ely- 
saunt totam terram cum pertinenciis in ColeshuU et Halghton quam predicta 
Margeria tenuit in dotem et predictam virgatam terre cum pertinenciis quam 
predictus Alanus tenuit. Habendum et tenendum eidem Elysaunt tota vita 
sua nomine dotis faciendo inde forinsecum servicium quantum ad predictas 
terras pertinet. Et pro hac concessione fine et concordia eadem Elysaunt con- 
cessit reddidit et quietam clamavit de se predicto Thome et heredibus suis totam 
terram cum pertinenciis quam ipsa prius tenuit in dote in ColeshuU de done 
predicti Osberti quondam viri sui et remisit et quietum clamavit de se predicto 
Thome et heredibus suis totum jus et clamium quod habuit in superplusagio 
omnium terrarum que fuerunt predicti Osberti quodam viri sui nomine dotis. 
Warwic'. Feet of Fines, Warwick, file i8, No. 2. 

There is no doubt at all that Thomas de Clinton married 
a lady with the unusual name of Mazera, an heiress, and that 
she was the mother of his children. Her father, whose name 
as connected with one of the Clinton quarterings, is usually- 
given as ' Bisege/ occurs thrice in the printed Testa de Nevill 
as James de Bysecht, Biseck, or Bisethe. He was living 6 
May, 1236, when he was assessed to the aid for marrying the 
king's sister, for a fee, held of Roger de Mowbray, in 
* Halestorp,' or in ' Olestorp, Bidmeswell and Wanton,' co. 
Leicester. ' Halestorp ' and ' Olestorp,' I suppose to be the 
same place — possibly one of the readings leaves something 
to be desired — now called UUesthorpe, not Woolsthorpe, as 
elsewhere identified, a hamlet in the parish of Claybrooke 
near Lutterworth in the county of Leicester. This property, 
with, in all likelihood, other land — for instance, Baddisley, 
subsequently known as Baddisley Clinton, co. Warwick, is 
stated to be derived from this match — descended from James 
de Biseck to Mazera his daughter, and it is her and her 
husband's dealings with the place which enable us, in part, 
to reconstruct a curious and entertaining history. 

Thomas and Mazera appear to have had issue five sons, 
Thomas, John, Osbert, William and James. Now there 
would have been nothing unusual, according to the practice of 
that or any other time, if one of these sons other than the 
eldest had been made heir to the maternal estate. That this, 
indeed, was intended will appear, I think, by the sequel ; 
but it was by no means the limit of the provision they 
desired to make for their younger children. They decided 
upon nothing less than a partition of their estates, to be 
effected in their own lifetime. William, the fourth son, was 


it seems in holy orders, and does not concern us ; while 
James, apparently, got Baddisley, but this point I have not 
tried to determine. There remain Thomas, John and Osbert. 
Omitting UUesthorpe for the present, the chief holdings to 
be disposed of were at Amington and Coleshill, co. Warwick, 
and at Lydiard, co. Wilts. Of these, C.oleshill went to John, 
with remainder to Osbert, by a fine levied when his father 
was, if our dates are correct, in his fifty-fifth year : — 

2 Se t 12 Oct finalis concordia facta in curia domini 

1260 T^g^s apud Westmonasterium a die sancti Michaelis 

in quindecim dies anno regni regis Henrici filii regis 
Johannis quadragesimo quarto coram Gilberto de Preston Johanne de Wyvill 
et Johanne de Kava justiciariis et aliis domini regis fidelibus tunc ibi presentibus 
inter Johannem de Clinton querentem et Thomam de Clinton impedientem de 
manerio de ColeshuU cum pertinenciis. unde placitum warantie carte summoni- 
tum fuit inter eos in eadem curia. Scilicet quod predictus Thomas recognovit 
predictum manerium cum pertinenciis una cum advocacione ecclesie ejusdem 
manerii esse jus ipsius Johannis ut ilia que idem Johannes habet de dono predicti 
Thome. Et pro hac recognitione fine et concordia idem Johannes concessit 
predicto Thome predictum manerium et advocacionem ecclesie predicte cum 
pertinenciis. Habendum et tenendum eidem Thome de predicto Johanne et 
heredibus de corpore ipsius Johannis procreatis tota vita ipsius Thome. Red- 
dendo inde per annum quinquaginta solidos ad duos terminos. Scilicet medie- 
tatem ad festum beate Marie in Martio et alteram medietatem ad festum sancti 
Michaelis pro omni servicio consuetudine et exaccione. Et post decessum 
ipsius Thome predictum manerium et advocacio predicte ecclesie cum pertinen- 
ciis integre revertentur ad predictum Johannem et heredes suos predictos. 
Tenendum de heredibus ipsius Thome inperpetuum. Reddendo inde per annum 
unum denarium ad Natale Domini, et faciendo inde servicium domini regis quod 
ad predictum manerium pertinet pro omni servicio consuetudine et exaccione. 
Et si ita contingat quo predictus Johannes obierit sine herede de corpore suo 
procreato, tunc predictum manerium et advocacio predicte ecclesie cum perti- 
nenciis integre remaneant Oseberto fratri ipsius Johannis et heredibus suis. 
Tenendum de predictis heredibus ipsius Thome per predicta servicia inper- 
petuum. Et predicti heredes ipsius Thome warantizabunt acquietabunt et 
defendent eidem Johanni et heredibus de corpore suo procreatis vel predicto 
Oseberto et heredibus suis si predictus Johannes obierit sine herede de se pre- 
dictum manerium et advocacionem predicte ecclesie cum pertinenciis per pre- 
dicta servicia contra omnes homines imperpetuum. Warr. 

Feet of Fines, Warwick, file 25, No. 14. 

A search through the feet of fines for Warwickshire and 
Wiltshire would in all probability show that this settlement 
was balanced by another in favour of Thomas the eldest son, 
and that, whereas in the case of Coleshill, Thomas the father 
retained a life estate, in the case of Amington and Lydiard he 
put Thomas his son in immediate possession. That this was 




actually done, whether by fine or otherwise, in the case of 
Lydiard, will shortly appear. With regard to Amington the 
evidence is more delicate. It is as follows. Thomas the son 
married, according to Sir William Dugdale, who derived his 
information from that baffling source ex autogr, penes some- 
body or other, ' Maud, daughter of Sir Ralph Bracebridge.' 
Doubtless the proof, I mean record evidence, exists somewhere 
for the match. It is not lack of material we have to complain 
of in these inquiries ; the skill to find and the wits to under- 
stand are more often at fault. As a matter of fact, whether 
she was born Bracebridge I have failed to find out, but in the 
printed Hundred Rolls^ under date 4 Edward I. (1275-6), when 
Thomas the younger was certainly dead, and Thomas the elder 
was almost as certainly yet alive, the jury for the hundred of 
Humbelford present that : — 

Matillis de Clinton [tenet] Aminton et solum dat auxilium vicecomiti et 
warth solebant esse geldabiles in omnibus cum comitatu et modo subtrahuntur 
nescitur quo warranto. 

I am happily not called upon to construe or interpret the 
passage, which I only hope I may have correctly ' extended ' ; 
but it is evident that Maud would not have held Amington, 
of her father-in-law's inheritance, unless he had divested him- 
self of it in her late husband's favour, which is the point we 
desired to make ; while incidentally we learn that Sir William 
was right as to her Christian name, and that she survived her 

It is only fair to add that in the same presentment occurs 
the entry : — 

' Johannes de Clinton pro ColeshuU,' 

which ought, upon lOur theory, to run ' Thomas de Clinton 
. . .' ; Thomas the father, whose life estate was secured to 
him by the fine, being still alive. A writ upon the Close Roll 
of the same year, 5 June, 1276, to the sheriff of Warwick 
directs him, as escheator, to cause Eudes la Zusch and Milisent 
his wife, sister and coheir of George de Cantelow, to have 
seisin inter alia of the knight's fee that Thomas de Clinton 
holds in ColeshuU ; and we should at first sight be certainly 
inclined to consider that the Thomas of the second entry is 
correct and the John of the first is wrong. The question is 
really vital, for if John was in possession by reason of his 
father's death, a whole superstructure of inference falls to the 


ground, let alone that a quantity of documentary matter 
becomes exceedingly difficult of interpretation. That Thomas 
was alive in 1276, I have no manner ' of doubt. Possibly 
he may have surrendered his life estate in Coleshill to his 
son, or possibly again the jurors by reason of his great age 
and retirement may have been the less particular in their 
finding. Of these explanations the former is preferable, 
seeing that in a document ten years earlier, and by its 
nature far more likely to be precise, the ownership is at- 
tributed to the son. By charter dated (October) 1265, that 
is to say after the battle of Evesham, the king grants to 
Roger de Clifford lands late belonging to William de Bir- 
mingham, Ralph Basset of Draiton, John de Bracebridge, and 
others, and the manor of Coleshull, late of John de Clinton. 
How this grant came to be made we need not stay to consider, 
for what follows, though it relates to a totally different manor, 
will supply the explanation. It will also, I think, suggest that 
even this entry on the Charter Roll, with all its presumed pre- 
cision, is not conclusive evidence of the actual ownership of 
Coleshill, when its forfeiture was threatened. 

The proof that Thomas the elder divested himself ot 
Lydiard in favour of his son Thomas is much more straight- 
forward. In consists in the record of a suit brought by his 
grandson and heir male presumptive, John de Clinton the 
younger, against Osbert de Clinton, the young man's uncle, 
third son of the patriarch, and in reality against the patri- 
arch, that is to say, against Thomas the grandfather, him- 

It is our first notice of a distinguished man, John de Clin- 
ton of Maxstoke, usually reckoned as the first Lord de 
Clinton. He was born, if a record which follows is to be 
trusted, in or about 1258, and was accordingly, at the date of 
these proceedings, two years under age. Thus we may ven- 
ture to attribute to his grandfather's idiosyncracies with regard 
to the disposition of his estate his first and early initiation into 

The story is perfectly lucid as set out in the pleadings. 
Thomas the elder enfeoffed his son, Thomas the younger. 
Thomas the younger died, and John, his son, by his guardians, 
occupied the premises for half a year. Then Thomas the 
elder ejected him and gave the land to his son Osbert. Osbert 
held it till tempore guerre^ namely in 1264-5, ^ook the losing 



side, and the king, as in the case of Coleshill, conferred the 
forfeited estate upon one John de Grimestede, from whom 
John de Clinton now recovers. The proceedings are entered 
on membrane 12 ; the heading which, apparently, should pre- 
cede it, is on membrane 13 ; a membrane having, it seems, 
at some ancient date become misplaced : — 

Assise certificaciones et attingte capte apud Wyntoniam in octabis Sancti Hillarii 
anno regni regis Edwardi filii regis Henrici quinto [January-February, 

Placita coram rege apud Marlebergh a die sancti Hillarii in xv. dies anno E. 

Adhuc de octabis et quindena et assisis et juratis apud Marleberge^ 

Wiltes Assisa venit recognoscere si Thomas de Clinton senior Osbertus 
filius ejus et Johannes de Grimestede injuste etc. disseisiverunt 
Johannem filium Thome de Clinton junioris de libero tenement© suo in Lyde- 
yard Milisent post primam etc. Et unde queritur quod disseisiverunt eum de 
uno mesuagio tribus carucatis terre .xxx. acris prati. centum acris bosci. cum 
pertinenciis Et Thomas et Osbertus non venerunt. et non sunt attachiati quia 
non sunt inventi. Ideo capiatur assisa versus eos per defaltam. 

Et Johannes de Grimestede qui tenet predicta tenementa. venit et dicit. 
quod non intravit predicta tenementa per disseisinam set dicit quod predicta 
tenementa aliquo tempore fuerunt predicti Osberti qui tempore guerre fuit 
contra dominum regem propter quod idem dominus rex contulit tenementa 
ilia ipsi Johanni. Ita quod non habuit ingressum in eisdem per disseisinam immo 
per vicecomitem et preceptum domini regis. Et quod ita sit ponit se super 

Et Johannes filius Thome dicit quod predictus Thomas pater suus obiit 
seisitus in dominico suo ut de feodo de predictis tenementis et ipse post mortem 
predicti Thome statim intravit predicta tenementa ut filius et heres et quod 
exstitit bona et pacifica seisina. quousque predicti Thomas de Clinton et alii 
ipsum injuste etc. Et de hoc ponit se super assisam. 

Juratores dicunt super sacramentum suum quod predicta tenementa aliquo 
tempore fuerunt predicti Thome de Clinton senioris et quod ipse Thomas 
feoffavit de eisdem quemdam Thomam filium suum patrem predicti Johannis. 
tenendum eidem Thome juniori et heredibus suis de predicto Thoma seniore 
et heredibus suis inperpetuum. Et quod predictus Thomas junior obiit seisitus 
in dominico suo ut de feodo de eisdem tenementis. Et predictus Johannes 
filius suus statim post mortem patris sui intravit predicta tenementa ut filius et 
heres. Et postea predictus Thomas senior ipsum Johannem de eisdem ejecit 
et dedit eadem tenementa predicto Osberto. qui ea tenuit usque ad tempus 
guerre. Et quia predictus Osbertus fuit eo tempore contra dominum regem. 
idem dominus rex. dedit predicta tenementa predicto Johanni de Grimestede. 
Et quia compertum est per assisam quod predictus Thomas de Clinton feofavit 
predictum Thomam filium suum de predictis tenementis per quod feofamen- 
tum idem Thomas filius exstitit inde in bona et pacifica seisina. toto tempore 
vite sue post cujus mortem predictus Johannes filius predicti Thome fiHi. fuit 
in seisina de predictis tenementis. per custodes suos per dimidium annum et 


amplius quousque predictus Thomas pater ipsum injuste disseisivit. Et postea 
feofavit predictum Osbertum filium suum. per cujus forisf actum tempore guerre 
dominus rex contulit predicta tenementa predicto Johanni de Grimestede. Ideo 
consideratum est quod predictus Johannes filius Thome junioris recuperet 
seisinam suam de predictis tenementis versus predictum Thomam seniorem per 
viam recti. Et Thomas in misericordia. Et idem Johannes filius Thome 
junioris in misericordia pro falso clamore versus predictum Johannem de Grime- 
stede perdonatur per justiciarios. 

Coram Rege Roll, No. 20, m. 12. 

Thus John recovered. In the following year he succeeded 
to whatever else his grandfather had seen fit to leave otherwise 

The inquisition, taken in Leicestershire, upon the death of 
Thomas de Clinton the elder, with its extremely valuable dates 
for the pedigree, does not seem to have been utilized, at any 
rate in Dugdale's account of the family, though he refers to 
the proceedings by which its findings were traversed. In sub- 
sequent inquisitions of later reigns, one of the advantages is 
that the date of death is always given, or rather, in writs of 
later date, the day of death is one of the heads of inquiry ; 
and as a rule several, and different, days are given in reply. 
In the present instance we are not informed on what day 
Thomas de Clinton died ; but in all other details the docu- 
ment is rich ; and seeing that the inquisition is taken upon a 
writ of diem clausit^ we may feel sure that no long interval 
had elapsed between the death and the date of the inquiry : — 

Edwardus dei gratia etc. vicecomiti Leycestrie salutem. Quia Thomas de 
Clinton qui de Rogero de Munbray infra etatem et in custodia nostra existente 
tenuit in capite ut dicitur diem clausit extremum ut accepimus, tibi precipimus 
etc. Teste me ipso apud Turrim London' xij. die Januarii anno regni nostri 
sexto [1277-8]. 

Inquisicio facta fuit apud Leycestriam die veneris proxima post octabas 
Purificacionis Beate Marie anno regni regis Edwardi sexto [11 Feb. 1277-8] per 
sacramentum Roberti Burdet Hugonis Burdet Radulfi Danvers Roberti Domini 
de Brantingesthorp Rogeri Somervile Ricardi Burdet Willelmi de Walecote 
Radulfi de Merston Nicholai filii Domine de Essebi Roberti de Flavile Johannis 
de Schepe Willelmi filii Alani de Suineford juratorum qui dicunt super sacra- 
mentum suum quod Thomas de Clinton tenuit in dominico die quo obiit unum 
mesuagium et octo virgatas terre cum pertinenciis in Olesthorp de Rogero de 
Moubray quarum quelibet valet per annum in omnibus exitibus una cum capi- 
tal! mesuagio predicto .xvj. j. Item idem tenuit in eadem villa redditum libere 
tenendum qui reddunt per annum .x\].d. Et duodecim virgatas terre in ville- 
nagio quarum quelibet valet per annum in omnibus exitibus .xvj.j. Et duo 
cotagia que reddunt per annum vj.j. Et dicunt quod tenuit terram predictam 
faciendo predicto Rogero de Moubray servicium dimidii feodi unius militis. 
Dicunt eciam quod idem Thomas tenuit in eadem villa de honore Comitis 



Wyntonie redditum libere tenendum qui reddunt per annum iiij. d. Et tres 
virgatas terre in villenagio cum pertinenciis in eadem villa quarum quelibet valet 
per annum in omnibus exitibus .xvj. s. faciendo inde heredibus Wyntonie 
servicium duodecime partis feodi unius militis. Dicunt eciam quod idem 
Thomas non obiit seisitus de aliqua terra sive tenemento in comitatu Leycestrie 
in dominico suo ut de feodo set dicunt quod tenuit terram predictam ct tene- 
mentum in villa de Olesthorp secundum legem Anglie per mortem Mazere uxoris 
sue de quo procreavit filios et filias. Dicunt eciam quod Johannes filius Thome 
de Clynton junioris est propinquior heres predicti Thome. Et dicunt quod est 
etatis viginti annorum. 

According to this finding, Thomas was simply tenant by 
the courtesy, and upon his death the land passed to John, his 
grandson and heir, then aged twenty. The king's interest in 
the matter consisted in the fact, that not only was John de 
Clinton under age, but Roger de Mowbray, of whom the fee 
was held, was also a minor and in the king's custody. The 
return then, in this particular, is probably correct, and we 
get the date 1258 for John's birth. 

What does not appear from the return is that the owner- 
ship of the land was in dispute. The nature of the dispute 
appears by a writ, entered upon the Close Roll, addressed to 
the sheriff of Leicestershire, and dated, apparently (February), 
I277--8, directing him to keep safe, etc., the manor of Ulles- 
torp, which he lately took into the king's hands, by the king's 
order, at the complaint of John de Clinton (the younger), 
nephew of John de Clynton (the elder), which John de Clyn- 
ton (the elder) had demised to Thomas de Clinton, his father, 
deceased, for life, to revert, after Thomas' death, to the said 
John de Clynton (the elder), and in which the said John (the 
elder) had put himself immediately after Thomas' death, as 
pertained to him according to the demise, as he asserts. . . . 

This is not very perspicuous English ; but the gist of 
the matter is clear enough. John, the heir, was fighting another 
uncle. Before, it was his uncle Osbert ; this time his uncle 
John, who in some way was claiming a title derived from 
Thomas and Mazera, his parents, to the exclusion of his 
nephew. To clear the matter up the king directed a fresh 
inquiry to be held, by a writ in which the contention on 
either side is recited. The fresh inquisition, which was taken 
accordingly, appears to give complete justice to the uncle's 
assertions : — 

Edwardus dei gratia rex Anglie dominus Hibernie et dux Aquitanie, dilecto 
et fideli suo Ricardo de Holebrok senescallo suo salutem. Quia quibusdam 


certis de causis certiorari volumus utrum Thomas de Clynton et Mazera uxor 
ejus per cartam suam feoffaverunt Johannem de Clynton filium eorundem 
Thome et Mazere de decem et octo libratis terre in UUesttorp que fuit liberum 
maritagium ipsius Mazere ut dicitur et ipsum Johannem inde in seysinam posue- 
runt habendum sibi et heredibus suis. et idem Johannes in plena pacifica et 
diutina seisina inde existens terram predictam postmodum prefato Thome post 
mortem predicte Mazere dimiserit tenendam eidem Thome ad totam vitam 
ipsius Thome, ita quod post mortem ipsius Thome terra ilia prefato Johanni 
reverteretur, sicut idem Johannes dicit, an predicti Thomas et Mazera, qualis- 
cunque carta inde appareat, nullam seysinam dicto Johanni inde fecerint nec 
statum suum mutaverint, immo seysinam suam continuaverint usque ad mortem 
predictorum Thome et Mazere ita quod predicta terra descendere debeat 
Johanni filio Thome le jeovene primogenito filio {sic) ipsorum Thome et Mazere 
tanquam propinquiori heredi ejusdem Mazere, qui est infra etatem, et unde 
custodia ad nos pertinet ut dicitur ratione custodie terrarum et heredum Rogeri 
de Mundbray infra etatem et in custodia nostra existentis ; vobis mandamus 
quod in propria persona vestra ad locum predictum accedatis et per sacramentum 
proborum et legalium hominum per quos etc. diligenter inquiratis veritatem 
et certitudinem premissorum et eciam de quo vel quibus terra predicta teneatur 
in capite et per quod servicium et inquisicionem, etc. Teste me ipso apud 
Westmonasterium .v. die Junii anno regni nostri sexto [1278]. 

Inquisicio facta apud Olvestorp die Jovis proxima post festum Sancte Mar- 
garete anno regni regis Edwardi sexto (21 July, 1278) coram Ricardo de Hole- 
brok per dominum Adam de Napton, dominum Henricum de Notingham, 
dominum Johannem de Folevill, dominum Alexandrum de Harecourt, dominum 
Adam de Wheuleslesberg [Wethelesberwe], dominum Willelmum le Walays, 
dominum Radulfum de Grendon, dominum Petrum filium Rogeri, milites, 
Willelmum de Herdewik, Thomam de Nicole Godefridum de Nevill et Robert- 
um de Wyvill. Qui dicunt per sacramentum suum, quod Thomas de Clynton 
et Mazera uxor ejus feoffaverunt dominum Johannem de Clynton filium suum 
de decem et octo libratis terre in Olvestorp et ipsum inde in seisinam per Gal- 
fridum Heuse cum litteris predictorum Thome et Mazere patentibus posuerunt 
et idem Johannes per feoffamentum illud per quinque dies seisinam suam 
pacifice continuavit capiendo de tenentibus predicti manerii fidelitatem et 
dimidiam marcam pro recognicione. Dicunt eciam quod prefatus dominus 
Johannes de Clynton post mortem predicte Mazere matris sue dimisit predictas 
decem et octo libratas terre predicto Thome de Clynton tenendum ad termi- 
num vite sue, ita quod post ejus decessum predicta terra prefato domino 
Johanni et ejus heredibus integre reverteretur. Requisiti si predictus dominus 
Thomas post predictum feoffamentum in predicta terra sine licencia prefati 
domini Johannis intraverit, dicunt quod nunquam intravit, nisi per licenciam 
et voluntatem prefati Johannis. Dicunt eciam quod .xxiij. virgate terre de terra 
predicta tenentur de heredibus Rogeri de Mounbray per servicium dimidii feodi 
militis. Item .xvj. virgate terre tenentur de Johanne de Bosco per servicium 
quart e partis unius feodi militus. In cujus, etc. 

The nephew remained dissatisfied, and further inquiry 
s ordered upon a technical point, as appears by the follow- 
ing writ : — 

Dilecto et fideli sue Ricardo de Holebroc senescallo sue salutem. Quia 



inquisicio quam per vos fieri fecimus de manerio de Olesthorp quam Johannes 
de Clynton filius Thome de Clynton clamat ad se pertinere racione feoffamenti 
quod prefatus Thomas et Mazeria uxor ejus eidem Johanni fecerunt minus 
sufiiciens est eo quod post seysinam ipsius Johannis per .v. dies quam habuit de 
manerio predicto prefata Mazeria diu superstes fuit ut dicitur nec exprimitur 
in inquisicione predicta utrum idem Johannes post predictam seysinam quinque 
dierum seysinam suam continuaverit in tota vita ipsius Mazerie, et post mortem 
ejus, ita quod tanquam rectus et verus [dominus] manerii illius rem ipsam pre- 
fato Thome dimettere posset, an idem Thomas et Mazeria se in seisina manerii 
illius semper continuaverint et statum suum non mutaverint, vobis mandamus 
quod ad certos diem et locum quos ad hoc provideritis vocatis itero coram nobis 
partibus predictis []?er] sacramentum proborum et legalium per quos rei 
Veritas melius sciri poterit diligenter inquiratis veritatem et certitudinem 
premissorum et inquisicionem inde distincte et aperte factam nobis sub sigillo 
vestro et sigillis eorum per quos facta fuerit sine dilacione mittatis et hoc breve. 

A copy of the previous findings was transmitted with the 
above writ : — 

Inquisicio facta apud Olesthorp die Jovis proxima post festum sancte Mar- 
garete, etc. (as above). 

If this writ was executed, the return appears to be lost ; 
but that the uncle won the day is evident from an entry on 
the Close Roll : — 

13 November, 1278. To Richard de Holebrok, the king's steward, to de- 
liver to John de Clinton, 18/. a year of land in Olvestorp, as the king learns by 
inquisition taken by Richard that Thomas de Clinton, and Mazera, his wife, 
enfeoffed the said John, their son, thereof, and that Thomas (sic) had full seisin 
thereof by the feoffment aforesaid, and that John, after his mother's death, 
demised the same to Thomas for life. 

To suppose that John the nephew acquiesced was out of 
the question. He bided his time, and began again six years 
later. He was now of full age, and in every way a better 
match for his uncle. He reopened the case before the justices 
in eyre at Leicester in 1284 : — 

Placita etc. coram Johanne de Vallibus etc. justiciariis itinerantibus apud 
Leycestriam in Octabis Sancti Michaelis anno regni regis Edwardi duodecimo 

Vacat Johannes de Clynton junior petit versus Johannem de Clynton 

seniorem viginti mesuagia viginti et tres virgatas terre tres solidatas et 
sex denarios redditus cum pertinenciis in Ulvestorp. Et versus Willelmum de 
Berford unum mesuagium et duas virgatas terre et dimidiam cum pertinenciis 
in eadem villa de quibus Mazera de Clynton avia predicti Johannis junioris cujus 
heres ipse est fuit seisita in dominico suo ut de feodo die quo etc. Et unde dicit 
quod predicta Mazera avia sua fuit seisita in dominico suo ut de feodo tempore 
pacis tempore domini regis patris domini regis nunc capiendo inde expletias ad 
valenciam etc. et inde obiit seitisa. Et de ipsa Mazera descendit feodum etc. 


cuidam Thome ut filio et heredi. Et de ipso Thoma descendit feodum etc. 
cuidam Osberto ut filio et heredi. Et de ipso Osberto qui obiit sine herede de 
se isti johanni qui nunc petit ut fratri et heredi. Et inde producit sectam etc. 

Et Johannes et Willelmus per attornatum suum veniunt. Et Willelmus de 
tenement© versus eum petito vocant (sic) ad warantiam predictum Johannem 
de Clynton seniorem. Summonetur quod sit hie die dominica proxima post 
mensem Sancti Michaelis. Et Johannes de tenemento versus eum petito dicit 
quod alias in curia domini regis apud Westmonasterium ad impetracionem 
ipsius Johannis junioris versus ipsum regem seisivit idem rex predicta tenementa 
in manum suam. Et postea coram Radulfo de Hengham et Johanne de Kyrkeby 
auditoribus ad hoc per ipsum dominum regem deputatis facta inquisicio [ne] 
super utriusque ipsorum Johannis et Johannis jure per eandem inquisicionem et 
per consideracionem ejusdem curie reseytus fuit idem Johannes junior de eisdem 
tenementis. Et petit judicium si post inquisicionem illam ita sublimiter inter 
eos decindentem possit idem Johannes junior ad hujusmodi breve de possessione 
retrarere et per illud aliquid recuperare etc. 

Et Johannes junior dicit [entry unfinished], 

Jsstzf Roll, 457, fo. II. 

Not the least interesting side of all these proceedings is 
the pedigree that emerges. Here, in the nephew's pleadings, 
we discover an entirely new member of the family. John the 
younger was not, in the first instance, his father's heir, but 
only becomes heir, both to his father and grandfather, by the 
death of his elder brother Osbert, otherwise unrecorded. The 
case is adjourned ; the defence to the action, apparently, is 
that it is res judicata ; but still the nephew persists. To this 
date belongs the entry in ' Kirby's Quest' (12 84-5) for 
Leicestershire : ' De feodis Mumbray. Johannes de Clynton 
tenet unum feodum in Olsthorpe,' referring, I take it, to the 
uncle rather than the nephew. Finally, in the next year, the 
case is compromised for a payment in cash : — 

Placita coram domino rege apud Westmonasterium a die Pasche in xv. dies 
anno regni regis Edwardi terciodecimo [8 April, 1285]. 

Warr. Johannes de Clynton dominus de Coleshill miles cognovit hoc 
Leyc. scriptum in hec verba. 

Omnibus Christi fidelibus presens scriptum visuris vel audituris Johannes 
de Clynton dominus de Coleshill miles eternam in domino salutem. Noveritis 
me pro me et heredibus meis teneri et presenti obligari Domino Johanni de 
Clynton juniori militi filio Thome de Clynton in ducentis marcis argenti bono- 
rum et legalium sterlingorum eidem domino Johanni de Clynton juniori vel suo 
certo attornato hoc scriptum deferenti apud Tanworth ad terminos subscriptos 
solvendis. Videlicet centum libras ad festum sancti Petri ad Vincula anno 
regni regis [Edwardi] filii regis Henrici terciodecimo. et quinquaginta marcas 
ad festum sancti Michaelis anno regni ejusdem regis Edwardi quartodecimo sine 
dilatione ulteriori. Et ad istam solucionem bene et fideliter modo predicta 
faciendum me et heredes meos et omnia nostra mobilia et immobilia habita et 


habenda ubicunque fuerint inventa esse volo obligari et insuper eidem domino 
Johanni de Clynton juniori dominum Radulfum de Hengham ad premissa 
omnia fideliter facienda inveni fidejussorem qui se tam principalem debitorem 
quam fidejussorem invenit et qui una mecum omnes expensas dampna et in- 
jurias si quas vel que dictus dominus Johannes de Clynton junior sustinuerit 
occasione prefate pecunie ad dictos terminos quod absit non solute perficere 
manucepit et restaurare. cujus sigillum una cum sigillo meo presenti scripto est 
appensum. Et ad majorem securitatem hoc presens scriptum. tam coram 
domino rege quam justiciariis ipsius domini regis de banco feci irrotulari. Hiis 
testibus. Magistro Thoma de Sudinton. Radulfo Basset de Dreyton. Osberto 
de Hereford. Willelmo de Hereford. Johanne de Caue. Roberto de Assheborn. 
Johanne de Cestria. et aliis. Datam in magna aula Westmonasterii die Mercurii 
proxima post quindenam Pasche, anno regni regis Edwardi predicti terciodecimo 
[ii April, 1285]. 

Johannes filius Thome de Clynton junior cognovit hoc scriptum in 
hec verba. 

Warr. Omnibus ad quos presens scriptum pervenerit. Johannes filius 
Leyc. Thome de Clynton junior salutem in domino sempiternam. Nov- 
erit universitas vestra quod cum ego Johannes filius Thome de Clynton junior 
inplacitassem Johannem de Clynton seniorem avunculum meum et Willelmum 
de Hereford qui ipsum Johannem avunculum meum de tenemento versus eum 
petito vocavit ad warantiam et qui ei warantizavit nuper coram Johanne de 
Vallibus et sociis suis justiciariis domini Edwardi regis filii regis Henri ci 
itinerantibus apud Leycestriam termino Sancti Michaelis anno predicti 
regis Edwardi duodecimo incipiente terciodecimo [Oct.-Nov. 1284] de 
viginti et uno mesuagiis. viginti et quinque irgatis terre et dimidia et 
tribus solidis et sex denariis redditus cum pertinenciis in Ulvesthorp 
quod quidem placitum prefati justiciarii post modum adjornaverunt coram 
eis in itinere suo in comitatu Warwici. Et postmodum coram justiciariis 
domini regis de banco; concordat! sumus sub hac forma, videlicet quod 
ego predictus Johannes de Clynton junior ratifico seisinam predicti Johannis de 
Clynton avunculi mei de omnibus tenementis que idem Johannes habet vel 
aliquis nomine suo in manerio de Ulvesthorp unde aliquod jus michi competere 
posset ratione Thome de Clynton avi mei vel Mazere uxoris ejus avie mee. Et 
recognosco omnia predicta tenementa in manerio et villa de Ulvesthorp esse jus 
ipsius Johannis de Clynton senioris ut ilia que habet de dono predictorum 
Thome de Clynton avi mei et Mazere uxoris ejus avie mee et concedo quod pre- 
dictus Johannes de Clynton senior avunculus mens et heredes sui habeant et 
teneant omnia predicta tenementa in predictis manerio et villa cum omnibus 
suis pertinenciis de me et heredibus meis per homagium et servicium unius 
denarii ad Natale Domini reddendi pro omni servicio seculari exaccione et 
demanda. Et ego Johannes de Clynton junior et heredes mei omnia predicta 
tenementa cum omnibus suis pertinenciis sicutpredictum est predicto Johanni 
de Clynton seniori avunculo meo et heredibus suis vel suis assignatis contra 
omnes homines warantizabimus acquietabimus et defendemus inperpetuum. 
Et preterea remisi et quietum clamavi de me et heredibus meis omnibus 
libere tenentibus predicte Johannis de Clynton avunculi mei totum jus et 
clamium quod habui vel aliquo modo habere potui in omnibus terris et tene- 
mentis que iidem tenentes predicti Johannis de Clynton avunculi mei de ipso 


tenent in predictis manerio et villa. Ita quod nec ego nec heredes mei nec 
aliquis in nomine nostro aliquod jus vel clamium in predictis tenementis que 
iidem tenentes de predicto Johanne avunculo meo tenent. seu serviciis eorun- 
dem decetero habere vel vendicare possimus inperpetuum. Salvo tamen michi 
et heredibus meis homagio et servicio unius denarii per annum ut predictum 
est. Et ad niajorem securitatem presens scriptum inrotulari feci tarn coram 
domino rege quam coram justiciariis domini regis de banco. Hiis testibus. 
Dominis Radulfo de Hengham. Osberto de Bereford. Willelmo de Hereford. 
Roberto de Assheburn. Johanne de Kane. Johanne de Cestria et aliis. 

Coram Rege Rollf No. 91, m. i ; see also No. 90, m. 6. 

A further readjustment of the relations of uncle and 
nephew was effected three years later, and, as in the case of 
UUesthorpe, so in the case of Coleshill, their positions as tenant 
and overlord respectively were clearly defined : — 

Placita coram rege apud Westmonasterium a die Pasche in xv. dies anno regni 
regis Edwardi Sexto decimo. 

Ad hue de Tribus septimanis Pasche [28 March-17 April, 1288]. 

Warr' Johannes de Clinton senior attachiatus fuit ad respondendum 

Milisente de Monte Alto de placito quod cum de feodis militaribus 
que f uerunt Georgii de Cantilupo defuncti qui de rege tenuit in capite dominus 
rex assignaverit predicte Milicente sorori et alteri heredum ipsius Georgii in 
perpartem ipsam Milisentam inde contingentem quedam feoda militaria in 
balliva tua Inter que dominus rex assignaverit predicte Milisente unum feodum 
militis quod predictus Johannes tenet in Coleshull etc. 

Et Johannes senior venit et dicit quod tenet predictum manerium de Coles- 
hull cum pertinenciis de Johanne de Clinton juniore qui quidem Johannes 
junior presens est et cognoscit quod predictus Johannes senior tenet de eo 
predictum manerium de Coleshull et quod libenter respondebit predicte Mili- 
sente de predicto feodo pro predicto Johanne seniore. Et quesitus per quod 
servicium tenet de ipsa Milisenta predictum manerium, qui dicit quod clamat 
tenere predictum manerium de ea per servicium dimidii feodi militis. Et dicit 
ulterius quod Thomas de Clinton pater ipsius Johannis Senioris tenuit predictum 
manerium de Willelmo de Cantilupo communi antecessore Johannis de Hasting' 
et predicte Milicente per idem servicium et profert quandam cartam ipsius 
Willelmi de Cantilupo que hoc idem testatur. Et cum de feodis militaribus que 
f uerunt Georgii de Cantilupo defuncti qui de rege etc. dominus rex assignaverit 
predicte Milisente sorori et alteri heredum ipsius Georgii quedam feoda mili- 
taria, inter que predictus Johannes senior tenet unum feodum militis, ut 
dicitur. Preceptum est vicecomiti Warr', quod summoneat predictum 
Johannem de Hasting', quod sit coram rege a die sancti Michaelis in xv dies 
ubicumque etc. una cum predicta Milisenta, cui idem dies prefigitur, ostensuri 
si quid sciant dicere contra tenorem carte predicte. 

Postea die Lune proxima post festum Apostolorum Philippi et Jacobi anno 
regni regis nunc septimo decimo [2 May, 1289] venerunt tam predicta Mili- 
centa quam predictus Johannes de Clynton junior, set predictus Johannes 
de Hasting' particeps ipsius Milicente non venit, et habuit diem a die Pasche 
in XV dies anno predicto. postquam summonitum fuit. Et predicta Milicenta 



nichil dicit nec dicere scit contra tenorem predicte carte, et cepit homa- 
gium predict! Johannis de dimidio feodo militis. Ideo habeat recuperare 
versus predictum Johannem de Hasting' de quarta parte unius feodi militis 
etc. Coram Rege Rolls, No. no, m. 17; see also roll No. 108, m. 21. 

The utmost confusion has, very naturally, been occasioned 
by the existence side by side in the county of Warwick of the 
uncle and nephew, both called John de Clinton ; and the 
editor of the Parliamentary Writs confesses in a rare note that 
he had called a genealogical expert into consultation to dis- 
tinguish between them. It has seemed worth while accord- 
ingly to set out some of the evidence for this part of the pedi- 
gree at full. That it is convenient, in order to understand the 
descent of the lords Clinton, to reckon with the line of Clinton 
settled at Coleshill, appears finally from the odd circumstance 
that the inquisition taken on the death of the uncle is univers- 
ally referred, following Dugdale's lead, to the nephew. John 
de Clinton, the nephew, was living 5 August, 1309 ; he was 
dead before 7 January, 1310-1, when certain payments due 
to the king were remitted to his executors. John, the uncle, 
survived him by several years, and the following inquisition, 
with which we must take leave of the Coleshill branch of the 
family, refers to him : — 

Writ to the escheator citra Trentam ; whereas * John de Clynton, senior, qui de 
nobis tenuit in capite, diem clausit,' etc. 13 March, 9 Edward 2 (13 15-16). 

Inquisition taken at ColeshuU, 15 April, 9 Edward 2 (13 16). John de Clyn- 
ton, senior, was seised in fee at his death of the manor of ColeshuU, held of John 
son and heir of John de Clinton of Maxtok, who is under age, and was in the 
custody of the earl of Warwick [Guy, earl of Warwick, died 10 August, 1 3 15], 
and is now in the custody of the executors of the said earl, by reason of the manor 
of Amynton, by service of id. yearly and of half a knight's fee for all service. 
Which John, son and heir of John de Clinton of Maxtok, holds the said manor 
of ColeshuU of William la Zousch of Haryngworth, as parcel of the barony of 
Cantilupe, by service of half a knight's fee. There is there, etc. 

The said John de Clynton, senior, held no other lands of the king in chief in 
fee the day he died, neither ... of the said earl of Warwick, deceased, nor of 
any other, except the said manor. 

The next heir of the said John de Clynton, senior, is [? John], son of John, 
son of the said John, senior, and he was of the age of twelve years on the feast of 
St. Peter's Chains, in the year [? abovesaid] (i August, 1 3 15). The said John, 
senior, held no other lands the day he died in fee in my bailiwick, except the 
lands contained in that inquisition 

Inq. 'post mortem, 9 Edward 2, No. 53' 

There is an order entered on the Close Roll, 24 April, 
13 1 6, to John Walewayn, escheator this side Trent, not to 


intermeddle with the land of John de Clynton the elder, as the 
said John de Clynton held no land in chief. Another entry, 
in the same year, is worth noting to complete the pedigree. 
2 May, 13 16, Osbert, son of John de Clynton of ColeshuU, 
acknowledges that he owes 200/. to John son of John de la 
Beche, to be levied in default on his land in Norfolk. 

With these data we may venture to construct the following 
pedigree. It is remarkable in many ways ; but though the 
longevity of the persons mentioned in it is singular, and though 
children were born to them at more mature ages than was at 
all usual, I do not at present see an alternative to it : — 

Thomas de Clinton=Mazera 
n. circa 1206, ob. 
1278 aet. circa 72 

Thomas de Clinton=Maud viv. 

n. circa 123 1. Had 
Lydiard. Dead 
before 1264. 

at Aming- 
ton, 1276 

John de Clinton the 
elder, n. circa 1236, 
ob. 131 5 aet. circa 
79. Had Coleshill 

Osbert de Clinton 
viv. 1277 

Osbert John de Clinton the younger = Ida 
ob. s.p. n. circa 1258, ob. circa 1310 
aet. circa 52 

John de Clinton: 
n. circa 1270, 
ob. v.p. 

Osbert, son of John 
of Coleshill, viv. 

John de Clinton, aet. 12 
I 315, therefore n. circa 

John de Clinton William de Clinton 
n. circa 1300 earl of Huntingdon 

Clinton of 

To resume our enumeration — 

Thomas de Clinton (IV.) married Maud [Bracebridge] 
and had issue : — 

John de Clinton (V.), born as we have seen in 1258. I 
suppose that he was more than once married ; that his first 
wife died without male issue ; and that his children by his 
(second) wife, Ida de Odyngeseles, were born when he was 
over forty. With Ida came the manor of Maxstoke ; and I 
propose, for the sake of the dates, to set out a few particulars 
of her parentage, and the subsequent representation of her 
sisters, coheirs with her to their father, which are not without 

{^0 be continued^ 





IN one of the windows of the fine fifteenth-century apart- 
ment on the New Canal at Salisbury, known as the Hall of 
John Halle, are two glass escutcheons, evidently made by the 
same designer, which throw a ray of light on the subject, so 
ably treated in two recent numbers of the Ancestor^ of the 
arms of the King-Maker. 

These shields are small — 9 inches long and inches in 
width — and the glass, with the exception of one fragment, is 
undoubtedly coeval with the hall itself, which was built in 
1470 by John Halle, a wealthy wool merchant of the city, 
thrice a representative of the borough in Parliament and four 
times mayor of New Sarum. 

They cannot indeed compare in antiquity and stateliness 
with that great series of thirteenth-century glass shields at 
Salisbury, figured and described in an earlier ^ number of this 
review. The present writer has however made carefully meas- 
ured and coloured drawings of these venerable relics, so fragile 
yet so enduring, in the iiope that the accompanying repro- 
ductions, and a few words of description of them, may be not 
unacceptable to the curious in such matters. 

The first shield is the quartered coat of Richard Nevill the 
elder that displays the ensigns of the Salisbury earldom of his 
wife's forbears, in which he was summoned to Parliament, 
quartering his paternal coat-armour differenced by a silver and 
azure label, a shield that indicates with happy precision all the 
facts about his personality — the source of his peerage dignity, 
the fact that he is a cadet of his house, and his maternal de- 
scent from the Beauforts. 

It may be remarked that^ Doyle assigns these arms to the 
King-Maker, mistaking the Earl of Salisbury's seal (of which 
an illustration is given in Garter Plates * and reproduced in 

1 Jncestor, iv. 143 ; v. 195. ^ Ibid. iv. 120. 

^ Official Baronage, m. 588. 

* State Plates of Knights of the Order of the Garter, by W. H. St. John Hope, 
plate Iv. 


the Ancestor^) for that of his son, although what is left of its 
legend mentions the owner's possession of Cambrai, a lordship, 
according to Doyle's ^ own showing, of the elder, and not ot 
the younger Richard Nevill. 

The glass of this shield is very uneven in quality. Much 
of it is perfect in colour, but the two quarters of Montagu in 
the middle of the shield have changed to a pinkish yellow, 
while the fusils in them have almost lost their colour. Equally 
defective is the colouring of the four Monthermer quarters, in 
which both field and charge have faded to a pale yellowish 
green. The eagles are very tame-looking fowl. The draughts- 
manship is quite lacking in that strength of outline and vigor- 
ous conventionality which one expects to find in heraldic work 
of this period. 

The making of the Warwick shield presented to the artist 
precisely the same question as to the order of marshalling the 
coats displayed for the earl that had proved so difficult of 
solution to the engravers of the Warwick seals. The problem 
was solved in a manner highly original if hardly satisfactory, 
the designer labouring even more painfully than they in his 
eiForts to set the quarterings aright, and in the result the order 
is as remarkable as any mentioned by Mr. Round. 

The seven coats are arranged — not in the usual way hori- 
zontally with three in chief and four in the foot, but — in three 
columns, the two outermost having each two quarters. Beau- 
champ over Nevill and Monthermer above Despencer respec- 
tively, while the middle is charged with Montagu in the chief, 
Clare at the foot, and Newburgh between them. 

It would probably have been difficult for the designer to 
account for this surprising order, and yet the crudity of the 
arrangement seems somehow to be instinct with heraldic 
vitality, and the interest of this groping after a system of 
marshalling lies for the purpose of these notes in the fact that 
it adds one more to the long list of quartered coats of ' the 
last of the barons.' 

The only modern piece of glass in either shield is the 
Despencer quarter in this, which is Pugin's work, inserted at 
his restoration of the hall seventy years ago. It is totally 
without value except as showing how great is the gap between 

1 Ancestor, iv. 147. 

2 Official Baronage, iii. 242. 



the armorial taste and execution of the fifteenth and nineteenth 

On the other hand the work of the mediaeval craftsman is 
full of interest. The way in which the lower part of the 
Beauchamp quarter and that portion of the field of NevilFs 
coat which appears above the label are combined on one piece of 
glass, the curious leadwork of the gobony label, the elaborate 
construction of the Newburgh quarter, and the bold leading 
of the Montagu and Clare armorials are details small perhaps 
in themselves but certainly evidences of a daring ingenuity, 
an appreciation of effect and a wealth of dexterity that is truly 

In the Monthermer quarter the same poverty of design is 
observable that has been already remarked in similar quarter- 
ings in the Earl of Salisbury's shield. 

A conjecture may be permitted as to the probable raison 
d'etre of these two escutcheons. If a reason for the inclusion 
of Salisbury's arms in John Halle's window may naturally be 
sought for in the good citizen's desire to do honour to the 
memory of a local magnate, it is perhaps not altogether fanci- 
ful to see in his display of Warwick's quarterings a compli- 
ment dictated by political expediency. 

In the autumn of 1470, while his hall was a-building, the 
worthy merchant, mayor of this loyal city and a staunch parti- 
san of the house of York, was on the horns of a painful 
dilemma. Warwick had just landed at Plymouth and was 
pressing hot-foot to London. Edward's throne was tottering, 
and when at this juncture the great earl demanded that New 
Sarum should furnish an array of forty men Halle's loyalty 
and a desire to propitiate the winning side were tugging him 
in opposite directions. 

It seems to have been his conscientious devotion to the 
king that caused the mayor to delay the raising of the troops 
as long as he dared, while perhaps it was as a small private sop 
to a powerful foe that he placed Warwick's arms in his window. 
And it will be admitted that they serve another purpose as a 
splendid piece of decoration. 

Six months later Warwick and his schemes came to their 
appointed end on Barnet field, but this little memorial of him 
still survives, carefully guarded by its present possessors, to 
delight the antiquary of to-day. 



Under this beading the Ancestor will call the attention of press 
and public to much curious lore concerning genealogy^ heraldry 
and the like with which our magazines^ our reviews and news- 
papers from time to time delight us. It is a sign of awaken- 
ing interest in such matters that the subjects with which the 
Ancestor sets itself to deal are becoming less and less the sealed 
garden of a few workers. But upon what strange food the 
growing appetite for popular archeology must feed will be 
shown in the columns before us. Our press^ the best-informed 
and the most widely sympathetic in the world ^ which watches 
its record of science^ art and literature with a jealous eye^ still 
permits itself in this little corner of things^ to be victimized by 
the most recklessly furnished information^ and it would seem 
that no story is too wildly improbable to find the widest cur- 
rency. It is no criticism for attacking s sake that we shall 
offer^ and we have but to beg the distinguished journals from 
which we shall draw our texts for comment to take in good 
part what is offered in good faith and good humour. 

LORD DENBIGH'S mission to the Pope, followed by 
his campaign amongst New England clambakers, has kept 
his name before the makers of paragraphs and occasional 
notes. Watered by a thousand rills of printer's ink the great 
baytree of the Feilding legend has put forth new and strange 
foliage, and Lord Denbigh, returning with his honourable 
artillerists, has seen the ancestral figure of the Habsburg fore- 
father borne at the head of his triumph by a score of eager 

dfc 4& ^ 

"TV- -TV -TV- 

One by one the peerages have cast overboard Godfrey, 
Count of Habsburg, Laufenburg and Rheinfelden, the last 
two syllables of whose territorial title made him, to the 
ingenious minds of the seventeenth century, so probable an 
ancestor for an old family of Warwickshire squires, that 
justice demanded the production of a few of those documen- 
tary proofs which in such a good cause were never to seek. 
Mr. Round has long since thrown down the Lord Godfrey 
from his niche, and given the dust of their idol for a bitter 

205 O 



drink to the priests of the older genealogy, but that the 
journalist goes in no fear of Mr. Round is shown by these 
paragraphs from a great evening journal : — 

As well as being Earl of Denbigh he is Count of the Holy Roman Em- 
pire. Mr. Anthony Hope must have had the Feildings in mind when he 
wrote The Prisoner. They descend from the Royal house of Hapsburg, and 
every man Jack of them is christened Rudolf for his first name. Then, too, 
he is the eighth Earl of Desmond. 

He has not the remotest kinship with the old Geraldines, who were Earls 
of Desmond, the great enemies of the Butlers, Earls of Ormonde. The title 
passed to George Feilding, because James I. decided that it should, and that 
was all about it. The Feildings were a long-lived race. One of Lord Den- 
bigh's ancestresses died at the age of lio through falling out of an apple 
tree which she had climbed. The Geraldines had a habit of getting killed 
off earlier. 

Here we have the legend with new and pleasantly coloured 
frills. The house of Habsburg, indeed, called itself some- 
thing more than ' Royal,' but the countship of the Holy 
Roman Empire is handsomely confirmed to Godfrey's de- 
scendants. The house of Reuss in memory of its descent 
from Henry the Fowler christens each of its children Henry 
to the sorrow of the careful editor of the Almanach de Gotha^ 
and it may be that Rudolf is the font name of each Feilding, 
but the peerages show only the present earl, his father and 
his heir as commemorating in their names the ingenuity of 
the Rev. Nathaniel Wanley, the family pedigree-maker.. The 
Desmond note is a valuable tag to the legend, and more 
work for the genealogical inquirer is suggested, for if we 
allow that the Earl of Denbigh has ' not the remotest kinship ' 
with the old Geraldines, who were Earls of Desmond, how 
comes it that they reckon as an ancestress the venerable 
Katherine, wife of Thomas, the twelfth Geraldine Earl of Des- 
mond, whose age at death is taken for 104 years or 140 by the 
retailers of varying tales } 

^ •^f' ^ 

From the column enriched by the Feilding legend we take 
the following : — > 

Sir John Burgoyne, who is to be married next month to Miss Kate 
Gretton, is in his seventy-first year, and has been a widower for the last eight 
years. He is the tenth baronet, and the last of his line, there being no heir. 
Sutton Park, near Potton in Bedfordshire, is supposed to have belonged to 


John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, who gave it to an ancestor of the present 
holder in the following rhyming deed of gift : 

I, John of Gaunt, 
Do give and do graunt. 
Unto Roger Burgoyne, 
And the heirs of his loin, 
Both Sutton and Potton, 
Until the world's rotten. 

The Burgoynes were greatly enriched by the dissolution of the monasteries, 
the Robert Burgoyne of the time being prominently associated with the work. 

That John of Gaunt meant his gift to endure is shown, not 
only by the limitation ' until the world's rotten/ but by his 
abandoning the English of the fourteenth century in favour o^ 
the language of a later period, more easily understanded of the 
twentieth century — the spelling of ' graunt ' being a concession 
to the susceptibilities of Wardour Street. The rimed grant 
is one of a well known group. Edward the Confessor gave 
the keeping of a forest by such another grant, and William the 
Conqueror soon accustomed his Norman tongue to a form of 
verse which John of Gaunt made use of in more than one 
deed. Each grantor was careful to frame his verse after a form 
which would make it intelligible to the English journalist of 
after ages, and it is great pity that not an original document 
remains of the series. 

In the Burgoyne case the public records supply to the 
injury of the legend the ' niggling criticism ' denounced by 
those who do not love the Ancestor in their hearts. When the 
aid for knighting the king's son was collected in Bedfordshire 
in 1346, 'Sutton and Potton ' are lands of the Latimers, and 
on the collection of the king's subsidy of 1428 Thomas 
Swynford has come into possession of William Latimer's 
lands there, not having the fear of John of Gaunt's charter 
before his eyes, and unmoved by the beauty of the verse or by 
the rights of Sir John Burgoyne's ancestors who may well have 
sung it indignantly at his gate. 

# # # 

Another evening journal tells us that there is ' much unin- 
tentional humour in the history of national flags,' for ' the 
venerable gentleman who first designed the English flags which 
bore a lion on it, got mixed in his facts and outlined a leopard 



instead of a lion, and upon the continent the leopard was 
regarded as the English emblem/ If the first designer of the 
' English flag ' outlined a leopard thereon, how can an earlier 
flag have borne a lion ? Our paragrapher it is who is ' mixed 
in his facts.' The lion and leopard difficulty of the inquirer into 
questions of armory is easily explained. In the middle ages a 
lion who in shield or banner showed his full face was hailed as 
a leopard, and three leopards the banner of England has borne, 
and still bears, for all those who have not been taught by the 
post-medieval armorists to describe the national beasts as ' lions 
passant guardant in pale.' Therefore the unintentional 
humour, although of no sparkling quality, lurks rather 
amongst the verbal crudities of the paragrapher. 

* * * 

At a time when even the most serious of our halfpenny 
journals must find space to record the commands of fashion, 
many of our readers must find lacking in the Ancestor the 
column which should speak of toques and ermine stoles. But 
if these things be outside our view, we may at least warn our 
readers that a Norman origin is becoming demode, Anglo- 
Saxon ancestry will be worn during the present winter. 

* * * 

Fiction in this matter is a sure guide. Mr. Richard 
Whiteing's Yellow Van introduces us to a moated house lined 
with black oak to contain a family whose pedigree is sketched 
on the bold lines of the earlier novelists. This family had 
been snug in its moated home since King Alfred's day, 
flourishing in the unbroken male line. In this ancientry the 
old squire and his daughter had an honest pride of their own, 
but they accepted it without wondering at a family tree beside 
which that of the oldest family outside their moat is a young 
thing. The moat was deep and wide, as it might well be, 
seeing that at its limits the English law had stayed, the squire's 
ancestors having to a seemingly modern period possessed 
absolute power of life and death over their vassals. ' Every 
lord of a manor his own judge, jury and executioner,' the squire 
would say, modestly refusing to recognize the rare character 
of his family privileges. This modesty follows him as he 
points out to the duchess his amazing heirlooms, which include 
' a suit of Saxon armour, all steel, and all made in the place,' 
and for this too he has no wonder. In the outer world a 


king's armoury possessing a complete suit of plates of the 
fifteenth century would be raised by it to the first rank of 
collections. A suit of the fourteenth century might be sought 
in vain by an oil king or trust lord, and as the helm and 
byrnie which equipped an Anglo-Saxon for war can hardly 
carry the name of ' suit ' the moated house must lie in im- 
minent danger of a sudden foray of eager amateurs from the 
Kernoozers Club, 

Mr. SpofForth the cricketer is by his own confession an 
Anglo-Saxon. The SpofForth muscles, now peacefully em- 
ployed in the exercise which the sporting journalist loves to 
describe as * wielding the willow ' were developed by Gamelbar 
de SpofForth, one of those Anglo-Saxon heroes whose active 
resistance of Duke William staggered humanity after the mild 
fashion in which humanity might be staggered in the callous 
days before the blessings of a popular press. The SpofForths 
would have owned SpofForth to this day had not Duke William, 
in his resentment against a gallant foe, given it to one William 
de Percy, a foreign upstart from whom, as Mr. SpofForth believes, 
one of our ducal houses descends. Mr. Spofforth has all the 
caution of the true genealogist. The descent of the Percys of 
Northumberland may be a pedigree maker's figment, the 
descent of SpofForth from Gamelbar de SpofForth is all that he 
can vouch for. 

# # # 

Domesday is appealed to for evidence of the ancestor's 
doings, but in yielding the milk of legend Domesday is a 
grudging cow. We find that Gamelbar held SpofForth in 
King Edward's time, but Domesday students will hardly ex- 
pect to find him with his surname of ' de SpofForth,' seeing 
that surnames were neglected under King Edward. And had 
Gamelbar drawn a surname from his manor after the fashion 
of later days, there is no reason why he should have chosen 
SpofForth, for SpofForth was but one of his many manors. 

* # # 

If facts be appealed to, it would appear that the family of 
Mr. SpofForth has been found for some two or three centuries 
in the neighbourhood of Howden, and from them a New Eng- 
land family derives. To connect them with Gamelbar * de Spof-» 
forth ' an abbot of St. Mary of York and a prior of Helaugh 



have been produced, each with a surname of SpofFord or Spof- 
forth. But the regular clergy, although often pressed for the 
service, make indifferent links in a pedigree. One vow of their 
three keeps them from entering the main stream of the line, 
and the fact that their surname, as a rule, indicates their birth- 
place rather, than their family is a more serious difficulty. 
Five hundred years, therefore, of the earlier pedigree of 
SpofForth must be bridged with the frail plank of a family 
legend which probably had its origin in the first half of the 
nineteenth century. No SpojfForth family is known to the 
heralds of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, and the 
family arms are not to be found until Mr. Robert SpofForth ot 
Howden, who died in 1830, married a daughter of one 
Thurnell or Thornhill of Howden, whose arms the SpofForths 
would appear to have assumed. The history of the shield of 
SpofForth may be with advantage taken a step further as an 
instance of the hopeless confusion of English armories. Why, 
it will be asked, did a Thurnell or Thornhill take to himself 
this shield which is not one belonging to any family of his 
name. The reason is not far to seek. An early roll of arms 
ascribes the shield to a knight named Charnell or Charneles. 
Charnell miscopied into a modern book of reference becomes 
Tharnell. Thurnell takes the shield to himself and SpofForth 
helps himself innocently to Thurneirs plunder. 

These things being so we feel bound to declare Mr. 
SpofForth caught out, and Gamelbar de SpofForth may follow 
him to the pavilions. 

* * * 

Lord Powerscourt is one of the most persistent of our 
Anglo-Saxons. His last work reasserts that the Wingfield 
family is an ancient Saxon one which held Wingfield Castle 
before the Conquest. Now a castle cannot be satisfactorily 
held until it be built, and as Wingfield Castle seems to have 
been built long after the Conquest, and by another family to 
boot, the end of Lord Powerscourt's assertion needs correction. 
As for the Wingfield family, the evidences for its antiquity lie 
before us in Lord Powerscourt's own printed memorial. 

* * * 

First in importance come two lines of doggerel to the effect 


Wynkefelde the Saxon held honour and fee 
Ere William the Norman came over the sea. 


When we hear the Saxon ancestor bore so improbable a name 
as ' Wynkefelde/ we are in no fear lest Lord Powerscourt 
should put him in the box to confute our disbelief in him, 
nor has the couplet any note of antiquity. A document is 
next handed up reciting that the ' noble old building called 
Wingfield Castle was the seat of this family before the Norman 
Conquest, as appears by an ancient pedigree.' The precious 
evidence is labelled * MS. in British Museum,' which is for a 
reference as who should say ' Book printed in quarto,' or 
' Statement by a gentleman at Peckham.' Another legend 
follows which makes King Harold a guest of ' the noble thane 
of Wingfield ' before the battle of Hastings ; but Lord Powers- 
court does not allow himself to reason that there may have 
been a thane at Wingfield, and yet that thane might not be his 
ancestor. An inhabitant of Brixton is not by necessity a 
descendant of the Saxon Brixi. Finally, ' all authorities agree 
that Robert de Wingfield was in possession of the manor of 
Wingfield in the year 1087.' Which would serve us better if 
all authorities did not agree to conceal their agreement. 

* * * 

Although its pedigree be disfigured by this silly story of 
Saxon ancestry, Wingfield is nevertheless an ancient and 
interesting family, although its antiquity does not qualify it 
for a place in our series of articles on the oldest English 
families. The pedigree might be carried to the thirteenth 
century, although we doubt Lord Powerscourt' s ability to do 
so. A plate in his book of family memorials, wherein the 
brass of a Wingfield knight, who by his dress must have 
flourished about a.d. 1400, does duty for the Wingfield who 
was killed at Flodden in 15 13, which is as though a portrait in 
the Elizabethan rufF were presented to us for Queen Anne's 
Duke of Marlborough, does not inspire us with any respect 
for Lord Powerscourt's researches. 

* * * 

The recent quincentenary celebration of the Battle of 
Shrewsbury nourished a crop of the quaintest fictions in the 
comments of various periodicals. One or two of these deserve 
some notice. 

There is a tradition that one proud and valiant Salopian, who went to the 
battle of Shrewsbury and never returned, before going locked up his house and 
hung the key up in a tall tree before his door. The tree is still pointed out, 
but the key, by the corroding effects of five centuries, has become invisible. 



Old Parr was bred in Shropshire, but according to this writer 
he must give place to bold Admiral Benbow (the real hero of 
this legend). To have survived Shrewsbury fight of 1403 and 
die at last by Du Casse's chain-shot in 1702 is an honourable 
record of long service. 

^ ^ 

A member of the old Shropshire Sandford family commu- 
nicated to the press a long paragraph entitled 'The Sandford 
family and the Battle of Shrewsbury/ reiterates the enduring 
fiction of the Sandfords that ' Sir Thomas de Sanford, or 
Saundford/ the alleged founder of the family, came over with 
the Conqueror and fought at Hastings. But at Domesday 
one Gerard de Tornai held the manor of Sandford under Earl 
Hugh, and it was not until the reign of Henry I. or II. that 
the Sandfords became tenants in chief of this manor, which 
their descendants hold to-day. So long a pedigree, one would 
imagine, is none the better for a gingerbread Norman ancestor 
to head it. 

Another fictitious statement is that one 'Sir Richard Sandford 
was a knight-banneret and one of the body-guard of the king,' 
and that he was ' slain on the battlefield where he had recently 
been created a knight-banneret.' A Richard Sandford was 
indeed slain at the Battle of Shrewsbury, but the statement 
that he was a knight-banneret and one of the king's body- 
guard is merely decorative detail in the manner of the older 
genealogists. The contemporary Annales Henrici IV. give a 
list of nine persons who were knighted on the battlefield of 
Shrewsbury, but the name of Richard Sandford does not occur 
in this list. 

# ^ * 

Mr. Robert Jasper More, M.P. for the Ludlow Division of 
Shropshire, and a squire of a very old Shropshire family is 
lately dead and the undoubted antiquity of the More family is 
being mishandled by the newspapers in this wise : — 

The More family derives its name from the parish of More, near Bishop's 
Castle. Thomas de la More came from Normandy with Duke William, and 
was killed at the Battle of Hastings, leaving a son Sir Thomas de la More, who 
was ancestor of the Mores of More, county Salop. 

# * # 

Sir Thomas de la More is the familiar Conquest ancestor — 
one of those parchment figures with which the field of Hast- 



ings has been strown. More is not mentioned in Domesday, 
— it was then a member of the manor of Lydham, which was 
given to Earl Roger de Montgomery — but it was detached 
from Lydham, perhaps by Henry I., and exalted into a tenure 
by grand serjeantry. The duty of the lord of More was to 
carry the king's standard and lead 200 foot soldiers whenever 
the king invaded gallant little Wales. It was from this More 
by Lydham that Mr. Jasper More's ancestors took their name, 
and by this tenure they held their estate. The earliest known 
member of the family is one Adam of the More, who was dead 
in 1 1 80, when the sheriff of Shropshire became guardian of 
his infant son's estates. From this time the pedigree seems a 
genuine one. It is curious that Mr. E. P. Shirley omitted 
the More family in his Nohle and Gentle Men of England^ 
though the Mores were a gentle family long before the begin- 
ning of the sixteenth century. 


The Christmas season is at hand, but the Christmas num- 
bers of the magazines have as yet — alas, this fear of the Ancestor 
— yielded us little of the playful archaeology which we have 
grown to demand from them. Practised hands may be trusted 
to draw for us the Stewart cavalier and the Jacobite squire 
without erring notably in the lines of the buff coat and tie-wig. 
The medieval gives originality a looser rein. What could 
have been better than the mailed knight of last year, kneeling 
in the snow without the door, whilst his shriven neighbours 
flock to evening service in a church whose every line suggests 
comfort and hot-water piping. The true flavour, however, 
was in the legend beneath — without benefit of clergy. Now 
* benefit of clergy ' may be obsolete in law, yet its meaning 
of that benefit which a criminous clerk might derive from the 
fact of his clergy, should surely be familiar to us still. But 
that meaning is forgotten daily by the journalist, and is un- 
known even to Mr. Kipling who knows so many things great 
and small, else had he not named his story of that marriage of 
Ameera which no chaplain had blessed — 'without benefit of 

# # # 

Our Christmas fiction carries the present into the past with 
such assurance that we should read without surprise of the post- 
man with his bag of Christmas cards approaching the castle's 



, outer bailey through the snow, and cautiously, in reasonable 
fear of the warders crossbow. A last year's tale by a popular 
author gave us a Cavalier minstrel in Oliver's days earning 
from mine host his Christmas turkey — his turkey ! — with a 
jolly Christmas carol. And the carol he sang was ' Good King 
Wenceslaus ' (by the Rev. John Mason Neale). 



AN attempt has been made in the drawing that illustrates 
these notes to represent, as far as monochrome and 
accurate measurements allow, a lovely fragment of stained 
glass some five centuries old which is in the east window of 
the parish church of Hazelbury Bryan in Dorset. 

This shield of Montagu quartered with Monthermer is 
the most conspicuous object in the church. Small though it 
is, and placed at the top of the window, it catches the eye the 
moment one enters. It is barely 6J inches long, but the 
colours of it are so rich and glowing that it gleams like a jewel 
that owes an added grace to the mellowing increase of the 
years. Black and white are but inadequate vehicles for the 
representation of so fine a piece of colouring, but the relative 
values of the tints, the shape of the pieces of glass, and the 
quaint lines of the lead are given as accurately as possible. 

As is usually the case with heraldic glass of the middle 
ages the leadwork is very noteworthy. It will be observed 
how apparently capricious the lines are, yet how perfectly they 
fulfil their office and how admirably they aid the whole effect. 
The colours are wonderfully pure. The silver glass through- 
out is of a beautifully pearly tint. The red is a splendid 
crimson, though some of it has corroded and become nearly 
black. Monthermer's eagle in the second quarter is of a pale 
olive green, while his fellow is as brilliant as an emerald. The 
shield is by no means true in drawing, but the whole thing 
looks, and indeed is, perfectly right in feeling, and the bands 
of pale gold on either side of the shield going up into a 
rudely shaped loop above it add not a little to the decorative 

By the side of it, in a similarly shaped compartment of the 
tracery, is another shield of great interest, but so sadly broken 
and so clumsily repaired that only an outline sketch could be 
made of it. It is of the same size and shape as the Montagu 
shield, and displays the golden field and blue piles of Bryen 
impaling ermine with a chief sable indented and two lions gold 




in the chief. The woman's side of the arms, which happily 
is unbroken, is painted on a single slip of glass. The draw- 
ing of the charges is fine and vigorous, but the staining is 
markedly inferior to that of the other shield. 

Its value however lies in the fact that it gives a clue to a 
riddle that has puzzled the genealogists, what, namely, is the 
maiden name of the wife of Sir Guy de Bryen, lord of the manor 
of Hazelbury and eldest son of the lord Bryen, who was knight 
of the Garter. Glover's roll assigns this coat to Bures of Essex, 
but all that the pedigrees have to tell us about her is that her 
Christian name was Alice. It is evidently Dame Alice de 
Bryen whom this impaled shield commemorates. Sir Guy, 
the last male Bryen, died in his father's lifetime in 1386, 
leaving two daughters his coheirs and his wife Alice sur- 
viving him. Soon after his death the parish church was 
demolished, and in the first years of the fifteenth century the 
building of the present church, the third on the same site, was 
begun. It appears to have been continued till as late as 141 5, 
Dame Alice being meanwhile the patron of the living, and 
it seems certain that she marked her share in the work by this 
shield of her own arms impaled by those of her dead lord. 

The problem of the identity of the bearer of Montagu's 
quartered coat is not quite so clear. Only two of the earls of 
Salisbury bore it, John the third earl and Thomas his son and 
successor, and both of them were near of kin to Guy de 
Bryen, as this table of their descent shows : — 

William Montagu 
first Earl of Salisbury 

Guy Lord Bryen = Elizabeth Montagu, widow John Lord Montagu, 

I of Hugh Despencer second son j 

Sir Guy de Bryen = Alice, living 141 5 John Montagu, third 

ob. v.p. 1386 Earl of Salisbury, 

ob. 1428 

Thomas Montagu, 
fourth Earl of Salis- 
bury, ob. 1428 

Hutchins, the historian of Dorset, boldly asserts that the 
arms are a memorial of the fourth earl, but as he states in the 
same breath that above this shield is a crest of a horseshoe it 

Shield of the Arms of Montagu quartered with Monthermer. 


may be doubted whether his dictum is entirely trustworthy. 
Earl Thomas was indeed living while the new church at 
Hazelbury was in building and it is possible that if family 
associations led him to contribute to the cost his arms would 
be placed here as a memorial of him ; but his father was Guy's 
contemporary, and probability rather points to the third earl as 
the person who is indicated by this shield of Montagu. 



WITH a modest pride we note that Sir A. Conan Doyle 
has heeded the Ancestors warning. In the 'Author's 
Edition ' of his works we find Frank and Maude before 
the cross in the station yard at Charing Cross. Frank 
no longer remarks that ' the old cross is the same as ever in the 
old place/ and the monument has been shorn of its reminis- 
cences of mailed knights and heralds who doubled their 
honourable office with that of the trumpeter. But repentance 
comes slowly to Sir Conan. He has not yet grasped in its 
simplicity the fact that the cross in the yard is a modern one. 
It is still recommended to Maude's uncritical eyes as 'the 
beautiful old stone cross . . . that lovely reconstruction of 
Mediaevalism, the pious memorial of a great Plantagenet king 
to his beloved wife. Six hundred years ago that old stone 
cross was completed. It is a little thing of that sort which 
makes one realize the unbroken history of our country.' 

* ^ # 

Now it is possible that for Sir Conan Doyle and for Frank 
the cross in the cabyard is a lovely thing, and they may easily 
persuade Maude to agree with them. But the cross neverthe- 
less is not an ' old stone cross.' It is not the Charing Cross 
nor does it mark its site. There was once a famous cross at 
Charing hard by where King Charles rides to-day with his 
eyes upon the windows of the banquetting hall. But that 
cross was torn down ages before the South-Eastern Railway 
Company embellished its yard with its familiar ornament, and 
when Maude is told that the cabstand cross was completed six 
hundred years ago she is being deceived for the sake of cheap 
sentiment. A more unhappy illustration of the unbroken 
history of our country can hardly be instanced than this gothic 
toy which can recall nothing but an irreparable vandalism com- 
mitted long ago in another part of the city of Westminster. 

* # # 

The letter to the editor on the sad subject ot some archi- 
tectural vandalism is unhappily too familiar in the newspaper 



columns to rouse much attention. A circular from our con- 
tributor, Mr. Walter Rye, takes a form which should interest 
the most callous. Mr. Rye has been at work with his camera 
and can show us in picture after picture the wicked work which 
is being done at Norwich. The vandals against whom he 
takes up his tale are the Dean and Chapter of Norwich. These 
gentlemen hold in trust for Norwich and for England the great 
cathedral, and with them the municipal authorities are arraigned 
by Mr. Rye. 

The tale is as sad as it is old. The English people, pro- 
fessing itself enamoured of the ' quaint,' the ' picturesque,' the 
* old-fashioned,' has never a word or a vote to throw against 
the maiming or destruction of national memorials. Mr. Rye's 
photographs take us through Norwich and show us what is 
being done in the famous old town. We see the ancient flint 
wall which for five or six centuries has enclosed the Lower 
Precinct cast down to make way for a row of red-brick villas, 
of the mean type which trails along our suburban roads, which 
villas will make the new foreground for the view of the 
cathedral. Times are hard, it will be said, and deans and 
chapters must sacrifice beauty and fitness if need be for new 
sources of revenue. But Mr. Rye is at hand to assure us that 
the price of this vandalism is six poor ground rents of five-and- 
twenty shillings apiece. The dean and chapter must be in 
desperate case, but is it inconceivable that the town of Norwich 
might be willing to pay £q los, yearly to be spared such an 
eyesore } The Dean of Norwich is, we understand, a vice- 
president of the local archaeological society. His president 
and brother vice-presidents might do worse service for archae- 
ology than by persuading him to remonstrate with his tenant 
who uses the ancient wall of the precinct as a base for an ad- 
vertisement hoarding. A photograph of a factory which has 
risen next to St. Andrew's gives us a fair example of the in- 
jury which an unchecked individualism allows any single 
citizen to inflict upon his fellows. 

The old churchyard wall of St. John Sepulchre has been 
destroyed for no better reason than that the incumbent or his 
wardens prefer the modern note of an iron railing of a stock 
pattern. The guardians of Tunstead Church out in the 



country beyond Norwich are with them in regarding an old 
and picturesque churchyard wall as an unseemly thing, but 
differ from them in considering something in stucco with 
sharply marked angles as the best substitute. 

^ ^ "jj" 

Mr. Rye's last word is spent against the winged Peace 
with Victory which is soon to make its bronze or brazen 
protest against the quiet lines of the Norwich streets. Here 
he will have few with him, for though as a nation we possess 
one statue which pleases the eye, as that at Charing Cross, to ten 
thousand which grieve and vex the passer by, we have never 
lost the faith that to add to the number of these sombre figures 
is a pious work. A wet day in London would lose half its grim- 
ness were there no statues dripping rain from trousers or toga, 
yet the newspapers tell us that Cripplegate will disgrace itself if 
it cannot raise the money to pay for a dismal idol which shall 
call up a shuddering remembrance of its late parishioner, Mr. 
John Milton. 

AJ- -V- -V* 

"Tv" w •TV" 

A correspondent — Themis by signature — is moved by Mr. 
Phillimore's assertion that his Majesty's judges support with 
their decisions Mr. Phillimore's views upon armory, to point 
out to us that his Majesty's judges are found amongst the 
lawless ones denounced by Mr. Phillimore. In three places 
within Lincoln's Inn — the chapel, the hall and the old hall — 
may be seen the arms of Sir Vicary Gibbs, treasurer of the 
Inn and Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, placed 
there by formal resolution of the Bench. This shield of 
silver with three battle-axes of sable can hardly have received 
official sanction, as it is one to which the Lord Chief Justice 
could certainly have made no valid claim. But although this 
is but one amongst many such blazons in the halls and chapels 
of the Inns of Court, Mr. Phillimore would do well to 
hesitate before he persuades an officer of arms to accompany 
him in a visitation of the offending shields. For the law of 
England is in the hands of these ermined outlaws, and the 
law of England in practice has added to the ancient and 
unchallenged right of an Englishman to assume arms by his 
own motion the permission to use his neighbour's arms if he 
prefer them. 


In 1896 Mr. George Tudor Sherwood, a record agent and 
expert in genealogy, began the useful publication of a little 
monthly magazine for advertising genealogical difficulties and 
recording memoranda of family history. Mr. Sherwood 
found little help in his venture, which soon came to an end, 
as its editing encroached upon the time at his disposal. But 
many genealogists to whose notice Genealogical Queries and 
Memoranda never came may be glad to know that the sets of 
the magazine, which can still be obtained from Mr. Sher- 
wood,^ contain several indices and memoranda of great value 
to enquirers. Thus we have a list of the pedigrees contained 
in nine MS. volumes now in the Tyssen library at Hackney. 
Another useful list is of those pedigrees compiled by Sir 
George Nayler, late Garter King of Arms, which are to be 
found in a collection of private Acts of Parliament in the 
Guildhall Library. Lists of genealogies follow from the MS. 
collections of Glover, Edmondson, Hasted, and a good index 
makes many hundreds of pedigrees accessible to the searcher. 

1 Mr. Sherwood's address is 50, Beecroft Road, Brockley, S.E. 






Sir, — 

The curious blazon of Thomas Metford*s coat^ in the 
October instalment of ' Fifteenth Century Arms * suggests 
that while this shield may be a variant of the arms of Metford 
its description is possibly due to a piece of careless tricking 
on the part of the compiler of the roll. For another and 
better known Metford, Richard to wit. Bishop of Chichester 
from 1390 to 1396, and then of Salisbury till his death in 
1407, bore for arms dancetty of four pieces gold aziire gold 
and sable. 

This shield with the original colouring still plainly visible 
upon it is boldly sculptured on the bishop's monument in 
Salisbury Cathedral. The monument consists of an alabaster 
altar tomb with the effigy of the bishop on it, covered by an 
arched canopy. In the spandrels of the canopy are four 
shields of arms : Metford's own coat ; the shield of the dio- 
cese of Salisbury ; the arms attributed to Edward the Confes- 
sor, intended, it may be presumed, as a reference to Richard II. 
in whose reign Metford was consecrated ; and the arms of 
England quartered with the three lilies of France which had 
been assumed by Henry IV. two years before Bishop Met- 
ford died. Round the edge of the arch is a finely carved 
wreath of martlets and columbine flowers alternately referring 
again to King Richard and his successor. 

The same portion of the roll gives the 
arms of another Salisbury dignitary — Master 
Gilbert Kymer, dean from 1449 to 1463. 
His signet, of which there are several im- 
pressions in the chapter muniments, had a 
wolf passant with the dean's initials, ' G.K.,' 
above his back carved upon it. 

Yours faithfully, 


BuRCOMBE Vicarage, Salisbury. 

^ Ancestor, vii. 213. 


Sir, — 

May I as a reader of the Ancestor ask the assistance of any 
of your readers who may be able to help me in the following 
matter : — 

Particulars of the life^ etc.^ of Daniel Archer, 
He was the third and youngest son of Andrew Archer of 
Umberslade, co. Warwick, born 1 702, registered at Tanworth, 
CO. Warwick. 

His elder brothers were Thomas, first Lord Archer, 
M.P. for Warwickshire and afterwards for Bramber, who 
inherited the estate, and Henry Archer, M.P. for Warwick for 
many years, who inherited the property of his uncle Thomas 
Archer, architect and groom porter, etc. 

By the will of his father, proved 1741, Daniel was prac- 
tically disinherited, having not more than £,100 nor less than 
£^0 per annum out of the revenues of certain farms ! his 
brothers being trustees, to pay the same to him quarterly, be- 
cause by his conduct he was unfit to have the management 
of an estate ! 

By his uncle's will, proved 1743, he has 'ten pounds for 
mourning if he cares to wear it,' but has a reversionary interest 
in the estate failing his two elder brothers or their heirs male 
in the name of Archer. The family in the elder branch failed ; 
Henry had no issue ; and Andrew, second Lord Archer, only 
daughters, the issue of the notorious Sarah, Lady Archer, the 
leading figure in several of Gilray's caricatures on gambling, 

The property at Umberslade, to which was added Henry 
Archer's estate, was divided among the four daughters, the 
eldest of whom was successively Countess of Plymouth and 
Countess of Amherst. 

I should be grateful for any information as to this DanieU 

83, Vincent Square, Westminster, S.W, 


Sir, — 

The following is taken from Annandale Peerage cases : 
John Johnston was born on Sunday, 3 September, 1665, 
and was the third son of James, first Earl of Annandale and 



second Earl of Hartfell. In October, 1674, he and his brother 
William (afterwards first Marquis of Annandale) went to 
Glasgow Grammar School. After that John went to Had- 
dington Grammar School, then kept by Mr. Herbert Kennedy. 
From there he went to St. Andrews University, and was still 
there 8 February, 1685, when he was studying fortification. 
His uncle, the Earl of Dumbarton, gave him a commission 
in his regiment, where he was converted by the priests, and 
was one of the revolting captains. He was imprisoned on a 
charge of high treason in May, 1689, and afterwards served 
in France with distinction. From 1693 to 1707 he wrote 
several letters to his brother William calling attention to his 
destitute state. The Duke of Queensberry obtained a full 
pardon for him 12 May, 1702. In this year his brother, the 
marquis, granted the ;^io land of Stapleton to him and the 
heirs of his body, whom failing to the marquis and his suc- 
cessors in the estate of Annandale. John Johnston died after 
1708 and before 1726, and as in the latter year Stapleton is 
the property of James, second marquis, John is supposed to 
have died without legitimate issue. Many persons however 
claim or have claimed to be his descendants. Of these : — 

( 1 ) John Henry Goodinge, afterwards Goodinge-Johnstone, 

claimed the Annandale honours as great-grandson of 
John Johnston by Elizabeth Belcher ; claim dis- 
allowed 1844. 

(2) In Baltimore, U.S.A., there are several Johnstons who 

claim to be descended from Gilbert Johnston, who 
they say was third son of the Hon. John Johnston 
and Elizabeth Belcher. 

(3) James Johnston of Leith (living 1897) asserts that he 

is great-great-grandson of John Johnston by a pre- 
vious marriage to that alleged to have been made 
with Elizabeth Belcher. 

(4) Kearsley 5 Peerage^ i799> mentions 'John Johnson, to 

whom the Marquisate, etc., were allowed in 1798.* 
This last John is said to be grandson of John 
' Johnson * of Powdean, an alleged son of the Hon. 

(5) Lastly, I am told that several Johnstones in the north 

of Ireland claim to be descended from him. 




Dear Sir, — 

In volume vii. of the Ancestor under the history of the 
Massingberds of Sutterton, Gunby and Ormsby, it is stated 
at page 12, line 13, that * Mrs. Massingberd's mother was 
Catherine daughter of Sir John Armytage, Bart.' I think it 
will be found on examination that Catherine was the grand- 
mother of Mrs. Massingberd, the Mrs. Massingberd being 
the daughter of William Dobson, alderman of York, who died 
in 1749, by Elizabeth Tancred the daughter of Christopher 
Tancred, who was married at Hartshead 19 November, 1679, 
to Catherine the second daughter of Sir John Armytage, Bart., 
of Kirklees. 

Yours faithfully, 


Kirklees Park, Brighouse. 


Sir, — 

It may perhaps interest readers of the Ancestor to learn of 
the existence of a third deed of the Kingmaker which bears 
the armorial seal described in Mr. Horace Round's two 
articles and illustrated in the upper photograph facing page 
143 of vol. iv. 

The deed 1 refer to is preserved at Hutton John, 
Cumberland, the house of my brother, Mr. A. J. Hudleston, 
and is one in which the Kingmaker makes a grant of 5/. a year 
out of his revenues from Penrith to Thomas ' Hoton de Hoton 
John ' in return for certain services rendered by him to the 
Kingmaker of his own free will and so forth. (Hutton John 
was held of the barony of Greystoke and had nothing to do 
with Penrith.) 

The deed bears the Kingmaker's autograph, ^ R. War- 
rewyk ' ; it was given at ' our ' castle of Middleham on 
20 August, I Edw. IV. (1461), and the style adopted by the 
Kingmaker is ' Earl of Warwick, Lord of Bergavenny, and 
Captain of the city of Calais ' : there is no mention of the 
Salisbury earldom, although the date is eight months after his 
father had been beheaded, which may perhaps mean that the 
Kingmaker did not assume the title of Earl of Salisbury until 
after his mother's death, and that she was living at a later 



date than April 1461 (vide Complete Peerage under Salisbury 
and Warwick). 

The seal itself has been somewhat knocked about, the 
crests, supporters and legend having suffered a good deal ; but 
the coat of arms is perfect and is very clear in detail : it shows 
a peculiarity in the ermine of the Newburgh chevron which is 
not quite clear in your photograph, viz. there is one ermine 
tail at the apex of the chevron, three tails on the dexter slope, 
but only two tails on the sinister slope. This — which I take 
to be an engraver's licence only^ — is on the first quartering of 
the fourth grand quarter ; the fourth quartering is interfered 
with by the rounding of the edge of the shield. The back of 
the seal has nothing but thumb marks. 

Ten years later Richard of Gloucester held the King- 
maker's manor and castle of Penrith, and he confirmed the 
yearly grant of 5/. to Thomas Hutton in another deed, which 
is still at Hutton John. 

Yours faithfully, 



Sir, — 

Might I, a subscriber and constant reader of the Ancestor^ 
so far trespass on your courtesy and space as to ask if any 
of your readers can inform me whether they may have come 
across a marriage in the fifteenth century between a Ferrers 
and a Bulstrode of Taplow ? 

The case stands thus : William Bulstrode died c. 1479, 
seised of Taplow, etc. ; and Thomas his son, aged twenty years 
and more, is declared to be his heir by inquest taken in 19 
Edw. IV. 

William Ferrers is in possession of Taplow, etc., c. 1490, 
temp. Henry VII. 

Who was the father of this William } He himself married 
Sibil, daughter of Thomas Doyley of Chiselhampton in 
Oxfordshire. A Thomas Ferrers is also mentioned in the 
official documents within the neighbouring districts of Bucks 
and Berks — being a juryman at a court held at Cookham in 
March 1506 ; and again at a court held there in May 1512. 
This Thomas would be a brother, or cousin, of William, as 

^ Certainly. — Ed. 


dates forbid him being either William's father or his son, 
another Thomas born c. 1510-20, who bought or redeemed, 
the manor of Cookham LoUybrooks, in 1589. 

An inquest of i Ric. III. shows that Martin Ferrers of 
Great Teynton in Gloucestershire left no male issue, his 
brother Henry (aged more than fifty-four years) being found his 
heir male. The same inquest shows them to be in direct 
descent from John, first Lord Ferrers of Chartley, and his 
wife Hawise de Muscegros, who brought that manor into the 
Ferrers family. John, first lord, died before 1320— i, since 
by that date Hawise had married her second husband. 

This shows that Dugdale, who killed ofF the two barons in 
the same year (1324--5), confused John of Chartley with his 
cousin William, first Lord Ferrers of Groby ; both of them, 
according to his statement, dying in 18 Edw. II. 

From the foregoing it would seem that there are two more 
brothers of William, sixth Lord Ferrers of Chartley, than were 
known to Dugdale, and that the chart should in this part read 
thus : — 

Edmund fifth Lord Ferrers 
of Chartley, ob. 1435 

William sixth Edmund succeeded John (according Martin of Great Henry born 

baron, ob. 1450 his brother, as heir to Dugdale), ob. Teynton, ob. c. 1430, suc- 

Imale, 1450, ob. s.p. I4^3» s.p.m. ceeded to 

s.p.m. manor of 

Anne (suojure Great 

baroness) wife of Teynton 

Walter Devereux 


The family of Ferrers of Fiddington in Gloucestershire, 
whose line of descent does not clearly appear, intermarried 
with Ferrers of Baddesley-Clinton (Groby line) in 1592, 
and would seem to be descended from this Henry. 

But, to return to my point, this William Ferrers of Taplow 
must be a cadet of one of the following branches of the family, 
Chartley, Groby, Wemme, or Bere-Ferrers. Of the last two, 
the first is all but impossible, and the latter scarcely admits 
of proof. 

I am, Sir, 

Your obedient servant, 


HoLYPORT, Berks. 




Sir, — 

A curious engraving of this nobleman by W. de Clerck 
was published in Van Meteren^s Memorien Van den Nerderlan- 
tsen (1610), His styles there given may be compared with 
those in his will on which I commented in the last number of 
the Ancestor. In Latin he is styled ' Comes Essexiae et Ewe ' ; 
in Dutch * Grave van Essex on' Ewe . . . Borchgrave van 
Hertfort en' Bourgcher, Heere van Ferres van Chartley, etc/ 


Sir, — 

As a subscriber from the first to the Ancestor^ I crave a 
little space to protest against what appears to me an unwar- 
rantable assumption in an article by the Reverend Charles 
Swynnerton which appears in your current issue. It is not my 
intention to criticize this article, except where the writer 
attempts to prove that the Swynnertons were in any sense lords 
of the manor of Whitmore, or legitimately entitled to be called 
* of Whitmore.' 

It seems to me impossible for any one who has devoted 
the time and attention which have evidently been bestowed on 
this article to have overlooked the following facts concerning 
the descent of Whitmore. 

At the time of the General Survey, one Richard Forrester 
held Whitmore together with other lordships. In the reign of 
John, some three generations later, according to 1'esta de 
Nev'tll^ one Ralph de Cnoton (or Knutton) held 36 virgates in 
soccage of the Crown, of ancient right in Knutton, Whitmore, 
and four other lordships, all veritable members of Richard 
Forrester's Domesday fief. Concerning this, Eyton, in his 
Domesday Studies for Staffordshire (p. 53), says : ' I cannot doubt 
that Ralph de Knutton was lineal heir or coheir of Richard 
Forrester, and that Richard Forrester's tenure by sergeanty or 
by thenage, if such it was, had been commuted into tenure by 
soccage by his descendant' 

From John, brother of this Ralph, the Staffordshire Collec- 
tion gives ample proof of the following chart pedigree given 


by Chetwynd, who is acknowledged by Mr. Swynnerton to be 
an authority : — 

Johannes dom. de = 
Whitmore j 

Johannes de Whitmore = Margareta fil. Rogeri 
I dom' de Swinnerton 

Rad'us de Whitmore = 

Joh'es de Whitmore = 
37 & 51 Hen. III. I 

Joh'es de Whitmore = 
18 & 31 Ed. I. I 

Rad'us dom. de Whitmore = 
12 Ed. II. I 

Joh'es dom. de Whitmore = Johanna fil. et coh. 
34 Ed. III. & 6 Ric. II. I John de Verdon niil 

EHz. fil. et coh. = Jacobus Boghay 
1 1 Ric. II. dominus de 

9 & 22 Ric. I. 

Mr. Chetwynd continues the pedigree to Edward Main- 
waring, who married Alicia, the heiress of the Boghays of 
(inter alia) Whitmore and Biddulph, which manors are still in 
the possession of a direct descendant of the aforesaid Edward. 
In the Staffordshire Collection (iv. 97) is mentioned a most 
interesting suit concerning this manor of Whitmore, but un- 
fortunately the decision is not recorded. Vol. vi. pt. i, 67, 70, 
75 explains the connection of the Burgilons with Whitmore, 
but throughout the whole collection I can find no single trace 
of an official entry connecting the Swynnertons with the owner- 
ship of any land in this manor. I would suggest as a more 
obvious explanation why none of the kinsmen of Roger lord of 
Swynnerton are mentioned in the subsidy rolls of 1327-33, 
that they held no lands at that time ; and the suggestion to 
account for the paucity of references in the court rolls of New- 
castle appears to me rather far fetched. 

I do not wish to occupy too much of your space, but I must 
suggest that the ' Final Concord ' (No. 79) quoted by Mr. 
Swynnerton, of which by the way I can find no trace in the 
Staffordshire Collection^ has been misread by him, and I would 
refer him to some one who has a knowledge of the ordinary 
usages of the ancient law of conveyancing for the proper 



explanation of this settlement. Staffordshire Collections^ 
vi. 195-291, shows the descent of this manor from the 
Whitmores to the Boghays, and from the Boghays to the 

I am. Sir, 

Yours faithfully, 

Junior Army and Navy Club. 

Sir, — 

In answer I would remind Mr. Cavenagh-Mainwaring 
that the pedigree of the Mainwarings, the Boghays, and the 
Whitmores did not fall within my scope. But I should judge 
that Mr. Cavenagh-Mainwaring is fairly well informed on that 
point. He cannot do better than follow the lead of Chetwynd 
and Eyton. For information as to his other difficulties I 
must refer him to my article and to volumes vii. and xxi. of 
the Staffordshire Historical Collections, He should read them 
all over very carefully again. 

Only as to one matter would I trespass again on your 
space. I mean the story of the homage and service of the 
lords of Whitmore in 13 13, and the story of the rent of a 
white rose to be paid yearly at Swynnerton. 

In 1285 John de Whitmore, with several others, contested 
the right of Roger, son of Stephen de Swynnerton, to the 
manor of Swynnerton, on the plea that they were nearer the 
succession than himself. They failed in their action, and in 
14 Edw. L, 1286, he and his friends were in misericordia for a 
false claim. The case was however re-opened at Michael- 
mas, 1286, and again at Hilary term, 1287, by Roger de 
Swynnerton in a plea against his opposers for false judgment, 
but, evidently by pre-arrangement, he made default and the 
case was dismissed. To satisfy John de Whitmore and pre- 
vent further litigation, he conferred on John de Whitmore a 
certain placea at Shutlane within the fee of Swynnerton, or 
rather * to John and Margaret his wife and the heirs of their 
bodies,' reserving to himself however his superior feudal right 
by the service from John de Whitmore of a full blown rose 
{una rosa florendd) on the Feast of St. John Baptist. This 


Margaret, wife of John de Whitmore, was, I think, Sir Roger 
de Swynnerton's sister. 

About the year 1300, or soon after, John de Whitmore 
demised his manor of Whitmore to his son Ralph, reserving to 
himself an annuity from the estate of £iOy and the superior 
right by the service of one rose {una rosa) also on St. John the 
Baptist's Day. Soon after this he probably died. 

The annuity of ^^lo however must have represented 
nearly the yearly value of the manor, the full rent of which 
was, at any rate, less than £20^ because if ^20 or more the 
Whitmores would have been compelled to take up their knight- 
hood, which they never did, but on the contrary went forth 
to the wars as squires, as ' Serjeants with barded horses,' or 
as mounted archers. The fact is the manor was but a small 
one, being only a manor within a manor, a sub-manor of the 
manor of Newcastle-under-Lyme. Added to this, much of the 
inheritance of the Whitmores had been lost to them. Thus 
the Swynnertons then held six bovates of land and a messuage 
of theirs in Chorlton, and Roger Burgilon similarly was 
possessed of a messuage and thirty acres of land in Whitmore, 
while in Butterton, which was of the demesne of Whitmore, 
the lords of Whitmore held nothing, for the tenants there held 
of 'Thomas dominus de Stuche (in Salop) et de Boturton, Moreover 
Ralph de Whitmore came into an estate heavily encumbered, 
and in 2 Edw. II. 1308, he granted his manor mill, with all its 
profits less two pounds (^quaraunte soutz)^ to be allowed to the 
said Ralph for each year on full settlement, to Sir Roger de 
Swynnerton for twenty years as security for a debt of £^0^ 
which probably represented the whole value of his land. Five 
years after, in 7 Edw. II. 13 13, matters reached a climax, having 
evidently gone from bad to worse, and in that year or the year 
before Ralph de Whitmore granted his manor to Sir Roger 
de Swynnerton, knight, and his heirs, and on the Sunday 
next after the Feast of St. Peter in Cathedra (Feb. 22) at 
Swynnerton, by a charter now lying before me, Sir Roger de 
Swynnerton granted the manor again to Ralph de Whitmore, 
imposing as a condition in satisfaction of his claims that the 
manor should be held by Ralph and by the heirs of his body 
lawfully begotten, of Roger and his heirs, by the service of 
a white rose {una rosa alba) rendered yearly on the Nativity 
of St. John the Baptist, and that if Ralph died without such 
issue, it should then revert to Sir Roger de Swynnerton, knight, 



and his heirs for ever. This arrangement was ratified and con- 
cluded by a Final Concord on the Octaves of Easter next 
ensuing. Unless then I misunderstand the transaction, 
which was something much more than an ordinary Fine 
and Recovery, Sir Roger de Swynnerton, knight, by this 
arrangement, became mesne tenant of Whitmore under the Earl 
of Lancaster, while Ralph de Whitmore retained his manor, 
but only as arriere tenant, no longer as mesne tenant. Thus 
Ralph de Whitmore gained his land and Roger de Swynnerton 
lost the amount of his debt. But he gained the ' white rose,' 
and the white rose was worth the sacrifice. And thus it was, 
as stated in my article, that the lords of Swynnerton in 13 13 
became possessed of the homage and service of the lords of 
Whitmore. There came a time however when the Whitmores 
were to redeem much of that which they had lost, and that 
time, I imagine, was in the reign of Richard II., when the last 
John de Whitmore made a match with one of the co-heirs of 
Sir John de Verdon, knight. But as to ownerships no one 
who knows his subject would think of using the word in 
that absolute sense at all in connection with feudal tenure. 
There was one ' owner,' and only one. But if Mr. Cavenagh- 
Mainwaring insists on the word, my answer is that the whole 
of the free tenants of the realm, even free tenants holding 
in villeinage, ' owned ' their lands with just as good a title as 
the lords of Whitmore. 

In conclusion, if I am right, and if Mr. Cavenagh-Main- 
waring can prove his descent from the old lords of Whitmore, 
I mean of course the Whitmores of Whitmore, I have given 
him a descent also from a Margaret de Swynnerton of the 
f time of Edward I., and if Chetwynd be right he can boast a 

descent moreover from a Margery de Swynnerton living in the 
reign of Richard I. What more can Mr. Cavenagh-Main- 
waring desire } 


Butler & Tanner, The Selwood Printing Works, Frome, and London. 


The History of the King's Bodyguard 
of the Yeomen of the Guard 

Instituted by King Henry VII. in the Year 1485 under the title ot 
^Valecti Garde Corporis Nostri^ 


His Most Gracious Majesty King Edward VIL 





The Edition, which will contain some seventy coloured plates, 
photogravures, collotype plates, etc., will be strictly limited to 300 
copies for sale and 15 copies for presentation. The names of sub- 
scribers before going to press will be printed in the volume. The 
price of the volume will be 35. net to subscribers before publication, 
after which the right is reserved to raise the price. 
The History will consist of : — 

I. Brief account of the Bodyguards of the Kings of England 

from Canute to Richard III. 
II. Creation of the ' Yeomen of the Guard ' by Henry VII. on 
or about the 22nd August, 1485. 

III. The Guard's first title, its first establishment, the first 

Captain and Officers, its original dress, weapons, pay, and 

IV. History of the Guard at Home and Abroad for 418 years, 

with detailed accounts of the Battles and Sieges at which 
it has been present, and the principal Historical Events in 
which it has taken part. 
V. Historical Roll of the Officers 1485 to 1903, and many 
Muster Rolls of the Yeomen at great ceremonies. 
These Historical Rolls give the dates of appointment verified from 
the actual Warrants in the State Records, and show that upwards of 
200 of our oldest families have had ancestors amongst the Officers, 
many of whom are renowned in English History. 


The Church Plate of the 
County of Hereford 


The Hon. Berkeley L. Scudamore Stanhope, M.A. 
Archdeacon of Hereford, and Harold 


Demy d^to. Illustrated, Price 31^. 6^. net 
Edition limited to 250 copies 

This volume is published with the view to furnishing a 
record of the Communion Vessels belonging to each Church, 
or Mission Church, in the County of Hereford, including one 
or two private Chapels. Similar works have already been 
published for several Counties, while in other Counties pro- 
gress is being made with such inventories. 

The size of the book is Demy-Quarto, bound in buckram, 
with 17 photogravure plates, and 9 half-tone plates from 
photographs and pen and ink drawings. The illustrations 
have been prepared by Messrs. T. & R. Annan and Sons, of 
Glasgow. The Parishes are alphabetically arranged for easy 
reference, and the name of the Parish is printed under the 
vessel pictured in each illustration. 

An Inventory of Church Goods in this County, as returned 
by King Edward VI.'s Commissioners in 1552-53, is included 
as an appendix, being the first time these returns have been 
published in their entirety for this County. 




Of the Public Record Office 
4 vols.y 2 IS, net 

The Fourth Volume Containing the INTRODUCTION and 
SUPPLEMENT may be purchased separately 

Price loj. 6d. net 

These Letters are the genuine correspondence of a family in 
Norfolk during the Wars of the Roses. As such they are altogether 
unique in character ; yet the language is not so antiquated as to present 
any serious difficulty to the modern reader. The topics of the letters 
relate partly to the private affairs of the family, and partly to the 
stirring events of the time ; and the correspondence includes State 
papers, love-letters, bailiffs' accounts, sentimental poems, jocular epistles, 

Besides the public new^s of the day, such as the loss of Normandy 
by the English ; the indictment and subsequent murder at sea of the 
Duke of Suffolk ; and all the fluctuations of the great struggle of York 
and Lancaster ; w^e have the story of John Paston's first introduction 
to his wife ; incidental notices of severe domestic discipline, in w^hich 
his sister frequently had her head broken ; letters from Dame Elizabeth 
Brew^s, a match-making mamma, who reminds the youngest John 
Paston that Friday is ' St. Valentine's Day,' and invites him to come 
and visit her family from the Thursday evening till the Monday, etc., 

Every letter has been exhaustively annotated ; and a Chronological 
Table, with most copious Indices, conclude the Work. 

HENRT HALLAMy Introduction to the Literature of Europe, i. 228. Ed. 1837 : * The 
Paston Letters are an important testimony to the progressive condition of Society, and come in 
as a precious link, in the chain of moral history of England which they alone in this period 
supply. They stand, indeed, singly, as far as I know, in Europe ; for though it is highly 
probable that in the archives of Italian families, if not in France or Germany, a series of 
merely private letters equally ancient may be concealed ; I do not recollect that any have 
been published. They are all written in the reigns of Henry VI. and Edward IV., except a 
few that extend as far as Henry VII., by different members of a wealthy and respectable, but 
not noble, family ; and are, therefore, pictures of the life of the English gentry of that age.' 

THE MORNING POST : * A reprint of Mr. James Gairdner's edition of The Paston 
Letters with some fresh matter, including a new introduction. Originally published in 
1872-75, it was reprinted in 1895, and is now again reproduced. The introductions have 
been reset in larger type, and joined together in one, conveniently broken here and there by 
fresh headings. The preface is practically a new one. ... It is highly satisfactory for 
readers who care about history, social or political, to have this well-printed and admirably 
introduced and annotated edition of these famous letters.* 

MANCHESTER GUARDIAN : *One of the monuments of English historical scholar- 
ship that needs no commendation.' 


The Stall Plates of the Knights of 
the Order of the Garter 1 348-1485 

Consisting of a Series of 91 Full-sized Coloured Facsimiles 
with Descriptive Notes and Historical Introductions by 

W. H. ST. JOHN HOPE, M.A., F.S.A. 

Dedicated by gracious privilege during her lifetime to Her 
Late Majesty QUEEN VICTORIA, Sovereign of the 
Most Noble Order of the Garter. 

'The edition is strictly limited and only 500 copies of the work 
have been printed. 

The object of the work is to illustrate the whole of the 
earlier Stall Plates, being the remaining memorials of the four- 
teenth and fifteenth century of Knights elected under the 
Plantagenet Sovereigns from Edward the Third, Founder of 
the Order, to Richard the Third, inclusive, together with three 
palimpsest plates and one of later date. 

The Stall Plates are represented full-size and in colours on 
Japan vellum, in exact facsimile of the originals, in the highest 
style of chromolithography, from photographs of the plates 

Each plate is accompanied by descriptive and explanatory 
notes, and the original and general characteristics of the Stall 
Plates are fully dealt with in an historical introduction. 

There are also included numerous seals of the Knights, repro- 
duced by photography from casts specially taken for this work. 

The work may be obtained bound in half leather, gilt, 
price Ifi net ; or the plates and sheets loose in a portfolio, 
;£5 10s, net ; or without binding or portfolio, net. 

ATHENj^UM : * It is pleasant to welcome the first part of a long 
promised and most important heraldic work, and to find nothing to say of it 
which is not commendatory. The present part contains ten coloured facsimiles 
out of the ninety plates which the work will include when completed. They 
reflect the greatest credit on all concerned in their production.' 

MORNING POST : * There is a fine field for antiquarian research in the 
splendid collection of heraldic plates attached to the stalls in the choir of St. 
George's Chapel, Windsor Castle, and it will be a matter of satisfaction to all 
who are interested in old memorials that Mr. W. H. St. John Hope has given 
close examination to these ancient insignia and now presents the results of his 
investigations, with many reproductions.'